I did not plan on reading Ron Miscavige’s book.  Since Ron spent dozens of hours on the phone with me after leaving Scientology to share his observations and thoughts about his experience I did not think there was anything else to be learned from him. Then after his first sensational press junket, his publisher St Martins reached out to me as follows:


Hi Marty,


The only book to examine the origins of Scientology’s current leader, Ruthless: My Son David Miscavige, and Me (published by St. Martin’s Press on May 3, 2016) is the revealing story of David Miscavige’s childhood and his path to the head seat of the Church of Scientology as seen through the eyes of his father, Ron Miscavige.


If you are interested in receiving a copy of the book to share with your readers, please don’t hesitate to let me know.




Christine Catarino | Associate Director, Marketing
ST. MARTIN’S PRESS | 175 Fifth Ave, 15th Fl., New York, NY 10010


So, I indulged Ms. Catarino and read the book.  I also complied with her request that I share the book with my readers. Here is my review:

It is ironic that St. Martin’s Press reached out to me to publish a review of its much-publicized book Ruthless by Ron Miscavige with Dan Koon. I had offered to conduct a free-of-charge fact-check on the manuscript but Ron and St. Martin’s ignored it. As Ron was well aware, I was in a particularly authoritative position to spot errors. I spent more than two decades working closely with Ron’s son David, the target of the book. Thus, I had more first-hand experience with him than anyone who has left the Church of Scientology he leads.  My motivation in offering the fact-check was to protect Ron from publishing defamations against his own son, and the deleterious emotional and spiritual effects that would ultimately have upon Ron himself.

After Ron left the Church in 2012 I spent dozens of hours helping him to better understand David.  He had never been in a position to know much about what David did most of his days. He had a lot of questions about stories he was being told by disgruntled former members. I had a lot of answers. None of them appeared in Ruthless. Instead, Ron and Dan apparently favored tortured and recycled opinions and ‘facts’ attributed to others or no one at all.

Upon leaving the church, Ron told me of much peer pressure he received from the scientology disaffected crowd to spill the beans on his son. Ron wanted my opinion. I told him that for a father to write a scandalous tell-all (what the media and anti-scientologists wanted to see and the only thing an American publisher would pay for) would be ill-advised for several reasons. First, Ron had absolutely zero first-hand knowledge about the lurid rumor mill material the anti-scientologists and media yearned for. Second, I questioned the moral propriety of a father writing an expose’ on his son; regardless of who the father and son may be. Third, I noted that a father-son expose’ would contribute nothing to intelligent public discussion on scientology; in fact, it could only detract from it. Ron expressed agreement with my reasoning on the several occasions we spoke about the subject.

      Ron informed me during our 2012 and 2013 discussions that he had two critical objectives in life.  One was to receive some retirement compensation from the church of scientology. He told me he had sought counsel with the then go-to anti-Scientology lawyer and had been advised he had no legal basis to make such a demand or claim. I suggested that Ron phone directly to his son David to seek financial help.  The second target Ron disclosed was to remain connected with his scientologist and non-scientologist family irrespective of the financial demands he planned to pursue.  I told Ron that that was simple. Just don’t cavort with people who are actively attacking scientology.  I said that given the fact that the church of scientology considered that I was one of the more influential anti-scientologists, he might even want to consider not communicating with me so often and so openly.  I advised that to flaunt his anti-scientology allegiances would be tantamount to disconnecting from his scientologists family. Apparently, he took my advice on both scores.  At least until he achieved the objective of obtaining a healthy retirement fund from David.

Ron then drifted deeper into the anti-scientology camp and I did not hear from him for a couple of years.

Having now read Ruthless I have a better sense why Ron and St. Martin’s declined my volunteerism. By the time I handed over my work product, there would not have been a book. I do not believe I have ever read a book more chock-full of hearsay, double hearsay, and anonymous hearsay than this one. A remarkable feat for an alleged first-hand account by a father about his son. The majority of sources for Ron’s published rumors leave a lot to be desired in terms of accurate memory, truthfulness and objectivity toward Ron’s son. For purposes of the review I’ll save readers the catalogue – but it is a lengthy one.

Absent the scandalous material Ron was told about his son, there is no material upon which to hang the rest of the book, the slant of its narrative and its message. Take all the passages prefaced with “he told me…”, “she said…”, “I heard…”, “others have claimed…”, “people have told me”, etc. out of the book and all that would be left is a pathetic self-apologia. It would be a hundred pages or more of justifying why Ron as David’s father bears no responsibility for how his son turned out. Ron repeatedly trashes his deceased wife to create an alibi for himself while assigning David’s first negative trait (his son allegedly complains too much) to her.  Ron based that on an embarrassing and cowardly venting about his former wife’s alleged continuous fault-finding with Ron.

Nowhere does Ron even attempt to reconcile that indictment of David’s mother with his repeated references to her advising that David not be thrown headlong into scientology as Ron had insisted. That is important because David’s second unkindly trait (aggressiveness) according to Ron is passed off on scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard. Per Ron Miscavige, that was impressed upon David so indelibly because of his being an exceptionally devoted scientologist – something Ron admittedly encouraged and his wife purportedly warned against. Ron conveniently omits his role in consistently urging David’s path with the superior salesmanship abilities Ron claims to possess. These facts make Ruthless read like a bizarre, self-absorbed case of cognitive dissonance playing out with Ron. He condemns Hubbard for creating his son while devoting a lot of the book to defending Hubbard (a courtesy he does not deign to afford to his own son). His left hand types that Scientology made his son intimidating and aggressive, while his right hand types that a significant result Scientology had on himself was “I never again even had the urge to strike her” – speaking of his wife whom he habitually brutalized over the previous decade.

One particularly ruthless section of Ruthless serves to illustrate how the book is the worst possible realization of the three reasons I suggested (and Ron once agreed) for not writing it in the first place. That is where Ron performs a lengthy psychiatric evaluation to assert his son is a psychopath. He cites a book to support his theory, The Sociopath Next Door by Martha Stout. Clearly, it is a book Ron has not read – yet another case of being told by others, in this case not disclosing the lack of first-hand knowledge. Ron’s book claims an altruistic purpose in attacking his own son. That is, he seeks the abolishment of the so-called Scientology ‘disconnection’ policy. In short, the doctrine holds that the only way to protect oneself from the fallout of a sociopath or toxic personality in one’s life is to cease all connection with him or her.  Ironically, had Ron read The Sociopath Next Door he would have learned that such a policy is not only not unique to Scientology, it is the very same method of dealing with toxic types called for by Stout; a view she shares with most recognized experts on sociopathy. Specifically, “The best way to protect yourself from a sociopath is to avoid him, to refuse any kind of contact or communication.”

In light of the fact that Ron’s book repeatedly claims his motive is to abolish that same practice in Scientology, and that Ron understood that his continued association with the anti-scientology community would in itself result in disconnection from his scientologist family, the very heart of the work would appear to be insincere at best and more likely hypocritical if not fraudulent. Ron had a choice and he opted for disconnection, even after being counselled on how to avoid it.

Stout’s book undermines another fundamental premise preached throughout Ruthless. That is on the subject of where responsibility lies if in fact Ron’s son were the villain he paints him to be. The Sociopath Next Door examines several popular theories in currency about the causes of sociopathy (ranging from genetics to our economics system). The theory Stout gives most treatment to points the bony finger right between Ron Miscavige’s eyes. It lays responsibility at the absence of or abuse by parents or guardians. She cites the considerable viable evidence obtained during the 1980s and 90s flood of American adoptions of young Romanian children. Those children wound up having an extraordinarily large criminal and anti-social record. Studies determined the misfits all held only one thing in common.  As infants and small children they had been orphaned as a result of anachronistic state birth control laws.  None of the sociopathic children received the physical and emotional love and affection afforded most children in their early formative years by their parents. Most suffered privation and corporeal punishment.

Had Ron read the book that most definitely would have stood out to him for the following reason. In 1998 I coordinated locating a number of people particularly knowledgeable of David Miscavige. Reporters for the St Petersburg Times were working on a feature about his son and asked me to arrange those interviews.  Ron and I spoke at length then about David and his upbringing. During the course of those talks Ron told me that he sometimes felt guilty because he regularly ‘beat the hell’ out of David when he was a small child. However, he then said with a measure of pride that since David became who he did he no longer regretted it.  He was proud because he drew a connection to that habitual corporeal punishment to David later having survived Scientology’s most dire chapter possessing the toughness to lead the church through it and rise to the top.

Ron was doing what I witnessed him often do, take credit for the exemplary adult he asserted his son had become. When David’s resilience brought admiration Ron’s way, he sought to intensify it with such braggadocio. When the outside world was more recently piling on Scientology and his son for allegedly being too aggressive, Ron apparently contracted a case of selective amnesia. In either event, a fact check would have indicted Ron Miscavige, applying the very psychiatric standards he used to attempt to bury his own son.

On that same score, an anecdote is in order. In 1981 a then 19-year-old David, his wife Shelly and I drove from Los Angeles to New Orleans to watch his family’s beloved Philadelphia Eagles play in the Super Bowl. We met Ron, his other son Ron Jr, and David’s mother (the Ron-maligned Loretta) there.  After a disappointing Eagles’ loss we went to a large buffet restaurant downtown. A group of victorious Oakland Raider’s fans chided us, noting that we were wearing Eagles t-shirts. Ron Miscavige started shouting profanities at the group of Oakland fans and approached them hostilely. He threatened to break their heads. I put a hand on Ron’s shoulder to prevent a brawl. He hit my hand away with a violent full swim move and kept marching. Only one thing stood between Ron and a fisticuffs that by the looks of him could have wound him up in the penitentiary for aggravated assault. His son David ran in front of him and looked him straight in the eye. “Cool it”, he said firmly. And Ron did. It wouldn’t be the last time David saved his old man from doing hard time in the big house. And that is yet another story Ron truncated and altered in Ruthless to vindicate himself while convicting his now-deceased wife and his son.

Ron Miscavige and his co-writer Koon have clearly taken to the anti-scientology agenda with some enthusiasm. It has created a Kafkaesque reality where Scientology (and by extension Ron’s son) has become in the words of former Scientology PR man Mike Rinder, “Fair Game.”  He defined that in a podcast as meaning one “can do or say anything against Scientology” and get off scot free.  A prime example were the authors’ responses to the Church pointing to a scandal involving Ron’s other son Ron Jr.  The Church referred to law enforcement documents indicating Ron Jr. was a regular client of a human trafficking prostitution ring. Ron Sr.’s response was, “It’s a convoluted mind that comes up with this shit.”  Mr. Koon said, “Dave can’t bring his father down, so the closest target is his brother. Dave doesn’t give a rat’s ass about any collateral damage to Scientology so long as his brother is squashed like a bug.”

Both Koon and Ron Sr. ignore the fact that their book invited such a response in as overt a fashion as possible throughout. One of Ron Sr.’s prime arguments for exonerating himself for how his son David allegedly turned out was to ask his readership to compare his villainous descriptions of David to his other son, Ron Jr.  For example, after vilifying David’s supposed negative behavioral traits – including “perversions” (no particulars are supplied), he writes “Yet who can say for certain these tendencies were part of David’s makeup from birth or they were learned?  Because none of my other children expresses these traits, I am inclined to think they were latent in him from birth.” (Incidentally, the genetic theory is the least useful of several according to Stout). He goes on to describe Ronnie as “the most considerate and thoughtful person you ever would want to meet.” Again relying on hearsay Ron Sr. offers Ron Jr. as comparative bait, “I don’t think Ronnie ever gave anyone reason to dislike him, and I have been told that, as adults, Ronnie and David couldn’t be more different.”  The released documents that Ron and Dan wail about indicate that Ron was living with his son Ronnie when he was arrested for repeated solicitation of sexual favors from human chattel. The latter fact is conveniently omitted from the book, while Ron Sr. describes his visit to Ron Jr. and his wife as akin to boarding with Ozzie and Harriett.

Yet, the Church and Ron’s son David are vilified for accepting their comparative invitation. The anti-scientology camp Fair Game policy apparently holds that if you are a Scientologist you not only are deserving of being marginalized and defamed, but if you resist you commit yet another unforgiveable, heinous crime.  I am not a fan of ad hominem attacks or counter-attacks. But, I am contemptuous of those who wield double standards in an attempt to leave a class of people defenseless against scandal-mongering.

Ruthless has mud-slinging opportunism written throughout it as does the history of its rollout.  Ron Miscavige first hit the headlines with the LA Times’ revelation that a Scientology-hired private investigator had been instructed by David to let his father die if he observed him having a heart attack while on a stake out. Ron’s handlers milked the story for all it was worth while Ron and Koon got busy on manufacturing a hearsay-heavy manuscript. When Ron later told me that he was in the process of inking a deal with St Martins Press to publish a tell-all about his son, he went out of his way to inform me that his change of heart about attacking his son had nothing to do with the wide circulation of the scandalous PI story.  I told him that was a good thing for him. Since he had acknowledged to me that Mike Rinder was part of his advisory team, I told Ron that I assumed that Mike informed him that the accusation about David instructing the private investigator is in fact “provable bullshit.” I waited several seconds for Ron’s reply, but there was silence. So I continued, informing Ron that Mike or I could tell him that in a combined fifty years of experience in directing Scientology investigative work, David Miscavige never once spoke to a private investigator. It was something he never would do and was far less likely to ever start doing the older he became. More silence from Ron.

Until many months later when he published his book and went on a marathon marketing tour. The entire prologue is a come-on promotional tease for the rest of the book, relying primarily on that big lie. It concludes with Ron Sr.’s feigned, wide-eyed wonder “And for a son to say that about his own father – just to let him die!? This book is the story of how that came about.”  Well, what about a father profiting by writing this about his son and repeating it at countless media promotion stops, when the charge has been credibly debunked?

In summary, my view is that paradoxically Ruthless is an apropos title for the work of Ron Miscavige Sr.

175 responses to “Ruthless

  1. Thanks Marty, for telling it like it is. I started the book but was unable to keep reading it. To say it lacks substance is a big understatement.

  2. Exactly. The book is trash. That is why I stopped reading after about page 12.

  3. Michael Fairman

    I guess Ms. Catarino got exactly what she asked for. Quite a revelation. Thank you.

  4. Wow… I guess the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.

  5. Very interesting review.

  6. “In summary, my view is that paradoxically Ruthless is an apropos title for the work of Ron Miscavige Sr.”

    Good summary. This review was ruthless too – refreshingly so.

  7. Really, I loved the book, Now I know why you love Hillary. Priv

  8. Waking up this morning I decided focusing on things which I’d find interesting, couple of hours into the fresh new day and I’ve read a very interesting book review, and how that had came about.
    I also know that in reading your essays I get the bonus of adding new (for me) English words to my disposal. This one wasn’t an exception.
    Thank you.

  9. Also, the implied compassion is gratifying. I get tired of the endless bashing of Miscavige and Hubbard by the same people who complain that the practice of scientology is devoid of compassion.

  10. Thanks for this. Put some things in a different perspective.
    I couldn’t finish the book. Lack of substance.
    Miscavige is more human than we tend to think.

  11. kurt hubbard-beale

    Thanks your comments seem to be analytical in nature. Best as always, Kurt Hubbard-beale Koh Samui 

    Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

  12. Thanks for some clean reason entered in the soup.

  13. We are all only as good as we have been bred and brought up.
    We are all products of a conception,a gestation, a birth and an upbringing.

    If you have a problem with the product, you check with the factory for the cause of the problem.

    Axiom 138 : Aberration is the degree of residual plus or minus randomity accumulated by compelling, inhibiting, or unwarranted assisting of efforts on the part of other organisms or the (material) universe.

    Aberration is caused by what is done to the individual, not what the individual does, plus his self determination about what has been done to him.


  14. TreasonousF**k

    Although you do provide good insights at times, such as the Super Bowl story where Dave effectively caused Ron to calm down, this is not even close to a well-balanced book review. Your viewpoint is basically that there is EVERYTHING WRONG about Ron’s book and his decision to write it and nothing right about it. The fact that you weren’t going to read it probably had more to do with your ego taking a blow because he disagreed with your advice to him not to write it. There is a lot of valuable information in Ron’s book that cannot be obtained anywhere else. Dave was age 20 during the 1981 Super Bowl.

  15. Once again Mark — you do not disappoint.

    I read the book. I finished the book. And rather than risk anyone else reading it. I threw it in the landfill.

    I knew many of the players. Either up close and personal, for awhile. Or by extension. Or by knowing someone who knew someone very well.

    You have never failed to remain true to who you are.

    Deep bow: hands in anjali


  16. Thank you very much for the clean information, Marty. The review is well written and truth from the heart. I learned.

  17. Wognited and Out!

    I think the Miscavige Family is as dysfunctional as many families out in the Wog world. Ron Miscavige Senior helped create the monster – David Miscavige.

    Interesting he did not mention the beatings – but that is what David Miscavige is doing – “dramatizing his case” and BEATING OTHERS.

    I find it interesting that he obtained at least $100,000 and David Miscavige claims to have given him his INHERITANCE – (whistling in the air) when everyone else in Scientology is covertly manipulated out of their inheritance in the best interest of Slappy’s enured lifestyle. I think the IRS and FBI could have a hay day digging into that lie.

    Ron Miscavige is on his journey out of the abyss and has to do a lot of work on decompressing and deprogramming – like all of us.

    It is hard work and takes courage and commitment to recover from the mind fuck of Scientology. Hats off to all of you who do the work.

  18. How long did it take you to read Ruthless? Wasn’t that book released months ago?

    And why bring up Ron Jr? He didn’t write the book. Don’t know why you have to drag his name into it and reiterate hearsay from ‘David’s’ camp.

    Seems to me like you should stay out of other people’s family business.

    Especially since you are so opposed to ‘hearsay’

  19. The reactions over at The Bunker astonish me grealy and I am disappointed.. Practically all take Tony’s viewpoint: he is defending Miscavige. Speculation goes wild. I suppose those with another take on it, stay quiet.
    It’s a pity to see a journalist like Ortega being so frustrated about Rathbun that he takes his own speculations and biased opinions for a gospel.

  20. Roger From Switzerland Thought

    I didn’t read the book and never had the Intention. Myself as a father can see the responsibilty of upbringing children and never would attack my own child, whatever the reasons are – as in the end I would be attacking myself.
    It’s a matter of really loving your child.
    It makes more and more sense.
    Well written Marty!
    Wolves are howling now 🙂

  21. (Facepalm)

    I for one am livid…..this kind of ‘trash-talking’ is specifically one of the things that the Code of a Scientologist was created to shut down. And this further drives home the point that THERE ARE NO SCIENTOLOGISTS ‘in’ Scientology, and have not been for many years. Even after making KSW #1 the First policy in every pack in every course, THAT was not enough to drive the point home……

    Did no one else get ANY lasting case gain?

    Oh, right. Case gain is measured in MEST now. Nevermind…
    The Miscavige family is obviously a family of ‘panty-waist dilettantes’ and will have their own special place in purgatory (if not worse).

  22. You are doing what you accuse Ron of in this review using gross generalizations, gossip and hearsay to make your point.

    There have been some excellent critical reviews of this book, particularly by John Duignan. But your review is just a sweeping generalizations and supposed conversations you had with Ron that we must take solely on your word?

    If you want to state that book is all wrong and had you “fact checked” it you would have not had any book left, then why not actually point out some of facts that Ron got wrong? If there are so many of them that you would have decimated the book surely you could take the time to point out five or ten errors, rather than just a random football story antidote from thirty years ago that really isn’t provable or have much to do with the real subject one way or the other.

    I’ve noticed you’ve offered to “fact check” several books but never got taken up on the offer. This seems to irk you instead of making you ask why. You refused similar services of fact checking and editing for your own books, and only tolerated glowing reviews, so your critical review of Ron’s book rings a bit more hollow than most. Doing some actual fact checking in your review, instead of hearsay attacks, might rectify that.

  23. I guess the father would know his own son.

  24. I chose not to buy or read Ron Sr’s book simply because it appeared to be self-serving to me, and I just didn’t want to indulge in it. What is written here in the review about the “provable bullshit” statement from David in relation to the private investigator caught my attention. I listened to the police interrogation tapes and heard the private investigator say that he spoke to David on the phone the day of the “let him die” incident, and that the man on the phone identified himself as David Miscavige. I’m not sure that this could be proven or disproven at this point in time. It’s the PI’s word against David’s, in spite of what Mark or Mike know based on past experience about how David operates with PI’s.

  25. Good job Marty

  26. For several years now I’ve been fascinated by Scientology. It was so addicting to read about. And I’ve never been in it. But this review made something click. As of today, I’m done with all of this nonsense. So much drama from everyone . . . so much lying from everyone . . . who needs this shit? It’s all just bad energy. So much flip-flopping. I’m out. Fuck you. Fuck Ortega. Fuck Scientology.

  27. Thanks for your view on Ruthless. I read it when it was released. I was expected some new revelations about DM and church management, but unfortunately I found it lacking, and in many places superficial. Its interesting to note how quickly Ruthless came and went, in six months time it will likely be forgotten.

    I find it difficult to put myself in Ron Sr’s position. He spent the latter part of his life in the Sea Org; no investments, no retirement plan, no savings. That must have been hard, and he may have felt desperation. Combine that with the bitterness that often accompanies one’s exit from Scn…well, you get the idea.

    So, is Ron Sr, an opportunistic old man? Cashing in on the notoriety of his son? Maybe. I hope it was worth it. Because in the end, he’s the one who has to live with it.

  28. ‘You have never failed to remain true to who you are.”
    Deep bow: hands in Anjali

    Really, he never failed to remain true to himself?

    Well I will say one thing for you Windhorse, when you go in you go all in.

    I hope someday you will stop bowing long enough to take a good look. You can’t see when your eyes are looking away.

  29. “Miscavige is more human than we tend to think.”

    Eloquent, thoughtful, and incisive, Sara. David Miscavige can’t be recommended highly enough.

  30. Mark – You write as if there is a monolithic anti-scientology camp. But there are a lot of critics, each with our own reasons. I have never been a member, but I’m a critic because it destroyed a dear family member. Other critics are former scientologists who have been subject to the RPF, physical or emotional abuse, coerced abortions, etc. Many of us comment on Tony Ortega’s blog because it has timely information about this evil organization. But not all commenters agree with each other, or with Ortega for that matter. It might be helpful to recognize the different approaches. And are you yourself now in the pro-scientology camp? Most of those in that camp are current scientologists, I believe.

  31. Ron Jr. = Ron Miscavige Jr.

  32. I love that term wognition! I fear I may have wognited all I’m going to now. Enjoy life.

  33. ” Mike or I could tell him that in a combined fifty years of experience in directing Scientology investigative work, David Miscavige never once spoke to a private investigator.” …

    ” The entire prologue is a come-on promotional tease for the rest of the book, relying primarily on that big lie.”…

    ” Well, what about a father profiting by writing this about his son and repeating it at countless media promotion stops, when the charge has been credibly debunked?”
    According to Marty Rathbun:
    Miscavige never spoke to a PI in my experience. Miscavige never spoke to a PI in Mike’s experience. So he didn’t speak to the PI in the matter of Ron Sr. This book is more than just mediocre, the entire premise on which it is based has been “credibly debunked.”

  34. Pingback: Book Review Review—Marty Rathbun on Ron Miscavige’s “Ruthless” – JennyAtLAX

  35. I think you misinterpreted me. Behind Miscavige I suddenly saw a young boy being frequently beaten up by his violent father. How afraid and damaged he must have been and maybe still is. That’s what I meant with ‘more human’. ‘Good Will Hunting’. In the end the perpetrator is also victim.
    Things are never black or white. Miscavige turned into a bully, a dictator in Scientology, but he is also an abused child that prevented his father from doing harm. Though I condemn the abuse in Scientology, I also have compassion for the child.

  36. I look forward to Marty’s review of Mommie Dearest

  37. Mark, I just posted the following in Sinar Parman’s “Scn Current Events” Facebook group in response to Dan Koon’s accusation posted at The Bunker:

    Accusation –

    “At the Bunker, Dan Koon posted: Joe Howard • 7 hours ago
    Just got off Skype with Ron and his wife Becky. The general consensus in Wisconsin and here in Sweden is that Marty is back in the employ of COB. First, he pulls the plug on a case that his wife was sure to win and now this.”

    My response –

    “Of course, in the Scientology Internet PR Wars, anyone who publishes any statement or claim contrary to one’s own propaganda agenda or calling that agenda into question in any manner must perforce be working for The Enemy. >:(”

    Michael A. Hobson
    Independent Scientologist

  38. Hello K Francis —

    Each of us has an opportunity to “find out who we really are” — but it isn’t easy — usually we just pile on more and more masks

    Since you do not know me in the slightest — how can you possibly say “Well I will say one thing for you Windhorse, when you go in you go all in.”

    All in where?

    AND by the way — you can ONLY see when your eyes are looking away … IMHO

    Otherwise we just SEE what we think we see — the other … and who that other is — remains precisely a projection and oft times the image of our, as yet, unaddressed shadow selves …

    Thanks for weighing in though


  39. Hi Marildi,
    Yes I know Ron Jr was Ron Miscavige Jr.
    My question still remains…..why drag Ron Jr. into any of this? He didn’t write a book

  40. I did not read the book. I just had no interest in a father trashing a son. Dirty business. I would expect exaggerations, justifications, rewritten history, selective memory, financial agenda. Human beings, in pain, with all their flaws in full view. Just not on my summer reading list. I wanted no part of it and still don’t. I would rather see Marty dissect and analyze something more useful along the lines of moving up a little higher. Not sure why he even bothered with this review except a need to set the record straight as he knew it. Done. Lets move on.

  41. From Ortega’s blog:

    “What Rathbun doesn’t say, however, is that it was the Powells, not Ron Miscavige, who said that David Miscavige spoke to them directly on a telephone, and they said so while being questioned by West Allis, Wisconsin police in taped interviews as part of a criminal investigation.”

    That would indicate strongly the veracity of the story that the PI’s were talking to DM. After all, Ron Miscavige wasn’t even aware of the arrests at that point.

  42. Freeminds, do you really think the only alternatives are “anti-scientology”/”pro-scientology”?

  43. Well said, Librarian.

  44. Hi Chee Chalker,

    I thought that question was answered pretty thoroughly, Here’s a key sentence:

    “One of Ron Sr.’s prime arguments for exonerating himself for how his son David allegedly turned out was to ask his readership to compare his villainous descriptions of David to his other son, Ron Jr. ”

    The paragraph containing the above sentence along with the paragraph before and the paragraph after it give a fuller explanation, ending with this:

    “I am not a fan of ad hominem attacks or counter-attacks. But, I am contemptuous of those who wield double standards in an attempt to leave a class of people defenseless against scandal-mongering.”

  45. Mark –

    The general consensus at Ortega’s blog and the ESMB sandboxes is that you are now working for COB and/or doing your A-E. One of the more interesting flag-wielders on the topic at other forums is a poster who calls themselves Anonlover, who considers your words about disconnection to form the basis of a de rigeur conclusion that you are “back” in scientology’s camp. (see forums, thread about your review here).

    Jeffrey Augustine (posting as J.Swift) offered up a supporting anecdote to Tony Ortega’s “addition” to his post of today, wherein he specifically lays out a conversation with two pi’s that happened at your house but while you were off talking with someone else. Jeff alleges that the two PI’s revealed that they were talking directly to Miscavige, obviously offered as proof you are lying about Miscavige in your post today.

    This is all typical of those who lack a strong character – defined as: “a strong character is one that will not be unbalanced by the most powerful
    emotions.” by Klausewitz in his 1800’s book “On War”.

    Since as far as I know, I’m about the only other person besides you to have taken a politically incorrect position regarding this whole Ron Sr media circus, I’m assuming that due to you and I’s civil interaction recently here at your blog, emotional responses versus character are probably ruling the roost towards Mike and I as well.

    I wonder how many people are now being told that Mike and I are also “working for COB” and “doing our A-E” because of that post of mine and what they saw happen here…

    Clearly, even the *idea* of allies instead of enemies is terrifying to those of weak character. Particularly those who have a vested interest in continuing a war – one that is conveniently in the wrong place and targeting the wrong enemies, thereby ensuring the real perpetrators are never held accountable.

    Virginia McClaughry

  46. I am confused – on the periphery, never a member, however I was in a (small, inconsequential) cult for several years. Ever since, I am naturally curious about what draws people into abusive “churches.” Marty seemed so honest and knowledgeable, so firm in his belief that DM was not a good man. Now he’s telling the world to lay off poor DM? I don’t get it. Even if he was an abused child, he is an adult now, and responsible for his behavior. Why shouldn’t Ron share his experiences and feelings in his own book? Dozens of other people have. The truth is not just found in one book – it is part of a large picture painted by all the authors. That picture is clear; DM is cruel, narcissistic and maybe worse. I hope the house of cards he has built falls down sooner rather than later. Individuals and families are being damaged every day due to his tyranny.

  47. Good question iamvalkov. No, I think 99.99999% of the world population has never heard of it. But among those who follow the organization, it seems to me that they have an opinion positive or negative about it, not neutral. (Indies seem to like LRH but not DM.)

  48. As you well know, Marty, one always runs into the kind of opposition/attacks that Ortega and others will ladle out whenever one even attempts to give a nuanced or diverse viewpoint on complex subjects which have numerous facets to them. The absolutist “one side against the other” unfortunately always has seemed to rule in most venues on planet Earth, and almost usually with some type of violence either psychological or physical.

    Well done on an incisive, thought provoking and well written review.

  49. You couldn’t keep politics out of something that has nothing to do with politics, could you, Mike? Or resist the opportunity to be snide to a political opponent?

  50. I found Ron Miscavige Senior’s book – RUTHLESS – to be pretty standard writing for an 80 YO man who is decompressing from a LIFETIME in an EVIL CULT. I find the money he received disturbing – so many Sea Org SLAVES never get a dime and are DISABLED from the mind F$#K!

    I LEARNED some things I did not know before which aided my HEALING from the trauma of SCIENTOLOGY BETRAYAL AND SCAM. FOR THAT – I am SO GRATEFUL to ALL of you – for writing books – it HELPED me HEAL

    Remember – we need to come out on a gradient….some of us here BELIEVED that L Ron Hubbard was a hero when we first got out and had to go ALL the way down that Rabbit HOLE to find the truth.

    It took some of us years to do that and some never go ALL the way.

  51. Hi again marildi,

    I see what you are saying, but was it really necessary to bring up the allegations against Ron Jr? Marty could have alluded to it another way (for example, use a generic term like ‘Ron Jr’s ‘legal troubles’).

    And just because Ron Sr. compared his two sons, that does not mean Marty had to continue the smears against Ron Jr. He could have said “the ‘church’ of Scientology has released loads of information on Ron Jr. Go and look it up if you are interested.” (We won’t talk about why a ‘church’ releases smear videos/websites on ANYONE because no authentic church would)

    ‘I am not a fan of ad hominem attacks, but I am going to use one now. But maybe if I qualify my ad hominem attack with a note of how I am contemptuous of those who use them, no one will notice me doing it’

    Also, I hardly think ‘David’ qualifies as a ‘class of people defenseless’ when he has an army of brainwashed robot attack dogs and an unlimited budget to hire endless lawyers.

  52. Marty,
    Since you have read ‘The Sociopath Next Door’ do you still agree with your previous statement that David Miscavige is ‘stark raving mad’?
    I seem to remember a video wherein you pronounced David as a sociopath or psychopath.
    (I could be thinking of someone else, since the term ‘sociopath’ is used frequently when describing David. But at a minimum, you have referred to David as ‘stark raving mad’. I’m just curious if you still believe that).

    As far as your somewhat curiously timed review of Ruthless, many have commented that it did not deliver any new surprises. So you’re not alone in that critique.

    What surprises me is that you don’t seem to appreciate the irony that your memory of the past is as much ‘hearsay’ as Ron’s. Why should we believe your recollections any more than anyone else’s?

    This reminds me of the standard sitcom tv plot where each character remembers a past incident differently and (of course) they all remember the incident in a way that portrays them I in the best light. And hilarity ensues.

    Furthermore, your attestation that Miscavige never spoke to PIs has already been debunked by two witnesses (Ortega and Jeffrey Augustine). I’m sure if anyone bothered to ask the two PIs that followed Pat Broeker they might remember things differently than you remember them.

    You can see why one might question your review in light of that evidence. It seems to me like you are saying ‘I remember things differently than Ron Sr. Therefore, Ron’s book is wrong’

  53. Hingle McCringleberry

    Note to self: If I ever write a book on Scientology, dedicate it to the Spirit of Volunteerism. Never ignore free-of-charge fact-checks and be sure to steer clear of double-hearsay and braggadocio. When selecting a title, ensure that it is apropos, but not paradoxical, even though a paradox involves multiple irreconcilable truths, rather than an ironic, unintended double meaning. Also, refrain from creating a situation for the subjects of my writing in which they are set in a nightmarish and inescapable labyrinth, like in a Kafka story. Keep these principles in line to avoid accusatory, confidence violating, and thorough albeit much belated and detail sparing excoriation.

  54. Times change, circumstances change. COB no longer has trusted associates like Mike and Marty to rely on. I imagine he increasingly feels he has to do everything himself. That’s been a self-fulfilling prophecy with him all along. But as he progressively individuates more and more, he has to do things himself for real. So now he may well talk to some PIs himself directly. By all reports he has often said no-one does anything right, therefore he has to do it all.

  55. Something to ponder – Do those who live by consensus, also die by consensus?

  56. Hemi Benvenisti

    Unfortunately, I agree SunnyV, and reading this “revew” is upsetting and saddening. An AGENDA more than anything else. This is my observation and I stand by it, sadly.

  57. upvote this

  58. “Always stay on the bridge between the invisible and the visible” – Paulo
    Coehlo —

    Brazilian author of numerous best sellers — notably “The Alchemist” which has been translated into 80 languages.

    His books have sold over 200 million copies.

    That “bridge” is where one FINDs him/herself (true self) —- the visible is too solid and the invisible is clearly uniquely personal and thus once it’s shared it becomes “visible” thus the “invisible” cannot be shared at all. The “bridge” is the razor’s edge where life begins and can be communicated by those who are willing to be seen.


  59. Did anyone watch “Holy Hell” on CNN last night?


  60. WOW!

  61. My point on the Paulo Coehlo post is:

    Marty (Mark) has always been willing to be seen. From everything, anecdotally or personally, that I know of him — contrary to what his detractors have to say.

    Most of us are not willing to be seen. Some of us try. Others are willing to be partially seen or seen only by those who employ them etc etc


  62. Or perhaps some have read what Marty has said directly, here at his blog, formed their own opinion based on Marty’s blog post, and commented about the story over at Ortega’s.

    There’s really no conspiracy just because several people after having read Marty’s blog post on which Ortega wrote about, and knowing the past history of Marty, his blog and the changes in directions it’s taken, DM, and Scientology in general, and having put some thought into the subject (perhaps based on their own experience, depending on the depth of their involvement) have arrived at similar conclusions.

    It’s as if seeing a conspiracy because a film critic blogs that Citizen Kane is a great film, Battlefield Earth was a terrible film, and the regular readers of the film critic’s blog agree in the comments section. It’s doubtful that they are all in agreement solely because they are repeating the film critics words and far more likely that having seen both films they’ve independently drawn the same conclusion as the film critic.

    I’m not saying your point doesn’t contain some merit. I won’t say that there aren’t those at The Bunker who don’t come off as agreeing with everything Ortega says just because he said it, but as I see it it’s far more the exception than the norm. One could say the same about the regulars here. Some obviously come across as Marty can say no wrong cheerleaders while others come across as people who have thought for themselves.

    Dismissing opinions one doesn’t like as solely being the product of group think and slavish devotion to a blogger, be it Ortega or Rathbun, is lazy, head in the sand behaviour. If you yourself believe that you came to your conclusions through independent thought based on observation, why assume that no one else is capable of independent thought? Instead of lazily dismissing the message by discounting the messenger as someone who can’t think for themselves, why not critique the message itself with a well thought out rebuttal that addresses the points made? If there is no truth to what they are saying it should be pretty easy to show that what they say is false without having to resort to labeling them as sheep involved in a conspiracy.

  63. I have been watching both this blog and Ortega’s blog. I am a “never in” but have for the past 3 years been a daily visitor to The Underground Bunker and both Marty and Mike’s Blogs.
    I have seen the horror and abuse that Mr. Rathbrn has been subjected too and followed his wife’s case closely. I was stunned when the case was just “dropped” and felt a lot of emotion over it because I was hoping that DM would be put on the stand and crucified by Monique legal’s team.
    The rift between Mr. Rathbun and Mr. Orgtega has widened over the past few months, along with a lot of the commentators on both sides of this issue.
    When I saw the Bunkers article yesterday and read it, along with Mr. Rathbun’s original article, I got even more confused.
    I have no real idea why Monique dropped her lawsuit, but I have an idea: After the brutality and craziness scientology subjected the Rathbun’s too FOR YEARS, I guess enough was enough, Stop the lawsuit and leave us the flock alone!!! Makes sense to me.
    I really don’t know or understand why Ron Miscavige did not seek Mr. Rathbuns input in the book and have not read the book so really can’t comment on either blogs critiques.
    I only know that the rift widens between two very important critics of a cult that is a very destructive element in our society that needs to be stopped and dismantled. How, when, or if it will ever be healed is an open question. The oblique suggestion that a deal was struck between Mr. Rathbun and scientology by the Ortega blog is far fetched to me…at this time. I will watch closely as these two blogs continue to inform on the destructive nature of scientology and its venomous and despicable leader. For the accusation that Mr. Rathbun has made some sort of secret deal with scientology has to be proved beyond doubt, that is not the case here.
    We shall all see if this rift and the accusation carry weight as time goes on, I only hope Mr. Ortega is wrong in his quiet but devastating suggestion…time will tell us all, and I hope he (Ortega) is very wrong and owns Mr. Rathbun an open apology.

  64. As someone who has actually read the book Ruthless – I can first hand say it is awful – no matter if you have a relationship to Scientology or are just interested in the subject – It is a Fathers story of his son who it seems he really didn’t spend much time at all with after David was 16 – 17. Most accusations in the book that Ron makes starts with ” I heard about ” or
    ” someone told me ” – I also agree with Marty epically when it comes to the fact that a father is selling out hear say about his son for financial gain – There is almost a chapter of the book dedicated to Ron leaving Scientology where just explains how he smuggled books out of Gold Base , I think it’s gold base , by some trickery of saying it was birthday presents – and then ends with the great escape of instead of going and eating cheese on one particular Sunday he drove away … – what the hell does that have to do with his son ? You can tell when reading it that Ron Sr. Knows little to nothing about his son past the age of 18 maybe 20 – so he fills the book with stories of making a album no one has ever heard of –
    In short the book sucked ass

  65. A parent in the Sea Org not spending much time at all with his/her children? Shocking!

  66. Chee Chalker: “‘I am not a fan of ad hominem attacks, but I am going to use one now. But maybe if I qualify my ad hominem attack with a note of how I am contemptuous of those who use them, no one will notice me doing it’”

    The above was your paraphrase and characterization of what Marty had stated. Actually, ad hom is not always invalid, as described in the following:

    “Ad hominem reasoning is not always fallacious, for example, when it relates to the credibility of statements of fact or when used in certain kinds of moral and practical reasoning.”

    The above was the whole point with regard to Ron Jr., which would not have been very effective or clear if Marty had simply said to check the reports of the CoS – as if they were the authority. That in itself would have been hearsay or, at best, the logical fallacy of Appeal to Authority.

  67. But but they are Thetans in little MEST boddies anyway:

    And no Thetan is related:


  68. I love you, I hope you find your bliss

  69. Posted by me Cornelius Anthonius Martens excersising my free speech acording to the American Constitution:

  70. Stay out of other people’s family business? The book is all about family business. Marty didn’t have a right to read the book? Or have a right to an opinion about it?

    Jesus Christ, it frightens the hell out of me to think that you may be called for jury duty. And someone’s fate could rest in your hands.

  71. “Why should we believe your recollections any more than anyone else’s?”

    Do you honestly think he was talking to you when he wrote this blog piece?

  72. Marty read a book and wrote a review. It has been twisted to mean whatever people want it to mean. All it means is that he read a book and left his review.

    I did not take it to mean he was defending anyone. But Tony already declared him very publicly of being in the employ of David Miscavige. So he has to put a spin any anything that slants it in that way. What else can Ortega put on his blog? “I was dead wrong. I was unjust. I mislead people. I fair gamed people. I started a witch hunt. I’m a backstabbing treasonous Mfkr. I’m an irresponsible journalist who slants anything anyway I can, that makes my dick hard. I failed in my attempts to dominate and bully Marty Rathbun and his wife into answering to me. I will keep asserting this injustice until my last gasping breath. BLAH BLAH BLAH…” ???

    Keep it going Tony. Milk it for all you can. You are the only person in the entire Scientology history, that owes your people a fresh knowledge report EVERY DAY. Whatever you have to do to keep it moving, I expect to see that from you every day. Every day this year, next year, the year after that and the year after that. You are the head of investigations and reports. That part of the Scientology culture, your fans can’t live without..

  73. Yeah, “Marty” wrote this. Right.
    Attempted objective: Dead agent Ron Miscavige Senior. (David Miscavige translation – Tear my father so many new assholes.)

    End Phenomenon: The book ‘Ruthless’ gets another free round of publicity, resulting in furthering the Scientology PR flap that is David Miscavige.
    Mark Rathbuns blog is now a confirmed PR wing of OSA.

    Keep Scientology Withering

  74. And Tony, don’t you even think about being late one day.

  75. You’re right, he was talking to people that believe every word he says.

  76. And keep the winning tone. Ruthless.

  77. .Until you are sitting in a sec check. Then we are all related. Laughter!

  78. Thank you for the declare. I was wondering when the town criers were going to show up.

  79. And get these fkn stats up. You have 1,216 web sites linking to your blog and your stats have crashed all to hell.

    Time to get even more, “invent” ive.

  80. You post FRESH EVERY SINGLE DAY, there is no excuse for this!

  81. Anonymous, what about the rumor that Marty is much older than he says and was that guy hidden by the trees in that fuzzy photo of the grassy knoll? Could you check that out please when you have the chance? (I’m too busy living life myself).

  82. He wasn’t speaking to me???? Rats. Now my world has come crumbling down.

    As a matter of fact, I do think he was speaking to me. And to you. And to the rest of the readers of his blog.

    “I also complied with her request that I share the book with the readers of my blog”

    I am a reader of Marty’s blog
    Marty was sharing with his readers
    Therefore, Marty was speaking to me and everyone else who reads his blog

    Please tell me that was not a serious argument on your part.

  83. “This is all typical of those who lack a strong character – defined as: “a strong character is one that will not be unbalanced by the most powerful
    emotions.” by Klausewitz in his 1800’s book “On War”.”

    I pesonnaly piss on militaristic shyte character definitions of a military age

  84. Is this that infamous “Brexit” thing ?

  85. This one is for your spouse Monique Rathbun

  86. Where you ever in Scientology?

  87. I want a Scientologist’s view on this sonf:

  88. At least a hundred posts referencing alleged misdeeds by Ortega were scoured from the internet and published on the last three topics. Did anyone not think Ortega would respond when he got a chance?

  89. Piggybacking because this the America not onley I love but wewant to see around the world:

  90. You are not a “reader of Marty’s blog”. You don’t read here from curiosity or want of information. Not even from interest. You are a dedicated heckler that works to discount, devalue, and undermine whatever he writes. .

    “Why should we believe your recollections any more than anyone else’s?”

    Today you post here, for the opportunity to call him a liar. If you can not believe him, why would you be reading here? . And you consistently, covertly and overtly accuse him of being a liar.

    .I’m beginning to suspect you are Monique Yingling posting here.

  91. That’s not what happened, but…I could be wrong.

  92. Unburying Nora Crest’s incisive comment out of the all the noise and dreck at Ortega’s site (for those who may not have seen it):

    “Ok (I may regret this later) but let me say this about that. I am not making an argument about MARTY I am making an argument for what he said about Ron and Ruthless.

    I think Marty breakdown is pretty accurate. Hold on, let me finish before everyone decides the throw me overboard.

    Here is how I see it. People from abusive homes are statistically more likely to themselves become abusers. That is just science. Ron admits he beat DM and his mother, but claims ZERO responsibility for how DM turned out. That was all Scientology, and LRH, but Scientology and LRH are wonderful because they helped me to stop beating my wife, but they turned DM evil. What? You can’t have it both ways. Scientology can’t be the evil that turned your son to the dark side and a salvation all at the same time. Pick a side.
    The difference between Ruthless and Troublemaker?

    Leah owns her faults. She fesses up to a bunch of shit right at the beginning and tells all the shit she did without sugar coating it or justifying it. She admits to disconnecting from friends. For reporting on them and all of that. She doesn’t make excuses for it or wish it away.

    Ron was very good at riding the DM wave. We all tread on egg shells around him when he came down to CC because he was DM’s father. In return he got lavish gifts (Like DM got) and a lot of perks. When the perks ran out, he (Ron) ran away. Then when he couldn’t make it on his own (and this is an ENTIRE other post about how the Sea Org treats old people that it discards, don’t get me started on the disgustingness of that) he got money and a house from DM he decided that wasn’t enough for him. So he wrote a book. Does he have a story to tell? Yes. Does Ron have the right to tell his story? Yes. But tell the real story. It isn’t pretty and he isn’t the hero. And that is a hard pill to swallow.

    Hell I have been working on my own book for over a year now. Why isn’t it done? Because I am writing down all my shit and it isn’t pretty. And it is HARD. It brings on my PTSD so full-blown that I don’t sleep. Do I really want all that out there? Probably not. Will it help someone? Maybe. Will I make a bajillion dollars and get a book deal from a publisher? Nope. I am not famous. I am not related to the Hubbards or Miscaviges. But I have two kids and above all I teach them to tell the truth, even when it’s hard. Even when you are the bad guy. You have to learn your lesson from the shit you do, and be a better person. That is what I have tried to do. That is why I spoke out in the first place. To tell the truth. Other wise why they hell is anyone talking about Scientology at all?”

    Why indeed.

  93. Ortega claims Dwayne Powell spoke with DM but if you listen to the tape from the New Daily News it was Daniel Powell, the son, who made that claim not the father. Daniel never spoke to anyone in COS his father did. the statement by Daniel Powel is at 37:50

    As always Ortega can’t get his facts straight.

  94. @Oracle.

    Did you have a nice trip? Apparently many people missed your comment on Mark’s Dangerous Story post. The one where you said something on the order of that you were off to move some things around and visit other cultures.

    All sorts of rumblings and even conspiracy theories about your lack of commenting (since then) have abounded.

    Here’s just a couple examples:

    Just went over and actually looked at Marty’s blog. To me it’s one of the most bizarre posts ever, not so much because of what’s there, but because of what’s missing: comments by the Oracle, and responses to any of the comments by Marty himself.

    …Also, where the hell is his #1 supporter The Oracle? She provided at least half the comments in his last few blog posts and now not a peep? Very strange. Did he manage to finally piss her off too? I just checked again to be sure she hadn’t finally appeared, but still nothing. Things that make you go, hmmmm.

    Personally, I think they just missed you. (ha)

    Clearly, they have come to depend on you as some sort of weather-vane to try and guess where Mark’s head is at, purely based on his *allowing* of your comments apparently.

    I’ve seen some even began to speculate that you *are* Mark using a sock puppet.

    You know, I’ll bet that if I said, even in jest, that it was *my* sock-puppet, quite a few of these jag-offs would actually believe it.

    Oh, the mystery of it all…

  95. “You are not a reader of Marty’s blog…if you can’t believe him, why are you reading here?”

    Which is it? Am I a reader or not a reader?

    I did not relalize one had to agree with Marty
    (or any blogger) 100% to read a blog.

    Sounds a little bit like Hubbard. If one does not agree with him 100%, then there is something wrong with that person. Not Hubbard of course.

    All I did was point some of the irony in Marty’s review
    As did several others on this blog.
    I did not realize that you determined who qualified as a reader.

  96. George L., that’s just plain silly. IMO, of course.

  97. Laughter! My take? If Marty had any kind of comment on Ron Miscavige’s book, he would have have mentioned it when the book came out.

    Marty beat the bushes. Kicked the Ortega bees nest. Waited to see which ones would jump for knifes. Come out of shadows a bit with enough motive. I read Ron Miscavige’s book. I loved it. Even bought his other two books. Loved them. I didn’t feel a need to throw acid in Marty’s face because he has a different take. He knew the man in a different way. But someone else, or some others, NEEDED this. For a full on front assault. Now he knows. he can be on top of the game. And the treason.

    Just my take.

  98. Dubiator Pythiae

    Good Evening, Oracle!

    I see that you’ve mostly moved on from grammar, and found a new linguistic victim- punctuation. I have heard that in the Spanish language, it is customary to use non-declarative punctuation at the beginning of a sentence, but with the mark inverted from how it appears at the end. I would like to know what it means when you both begin and end a declarative sentence with a period. This is new to me, along with the accusation that Legal Hellbeast Monique Yingling would post here without a significant increase in her customary retainer, payable in cash, check, or orphan tears.

    If you have any proof that she is posting here, beyond simple disagreement with individual and clearly defined aspects of Marty’s post, I would like to hear what you’ve got. From careful parsing of the standard of evidence you require to designate a target for a shrill haranguing, it would seem more evident that you read comments looking to be offended.

  99. Dubiator Pythiae

    In observing the celerity with which you will attack someone for holding views even marginally different than your own, I would be similarly frightened of you as a judge.

  100. Dubiator Pythiae

    I simply have to ask: Do you honestly think of something more to add that simply must be said about every five or six minutes until you’re distracted? What distracts you, and if it didn’t, would you keep on either adding small bits to your comments or continuing to post repetitious versions of the same idea ad infinitem? Is there any internal, mental review process, or do you lose interest, or something like that?

    Without knowing Tony, I can genuinely think of at least two reasons just off the top of my head why a blog author might find it prudent to maintain a regular posting schedule. None of those reasons has anything to do with Scientology, either.

    Could it be some sort of emotional need to keep hitting out at the target of your ire over and over again until you feel satisfied? You seem to follow this pattern of behavior regularly.

  101. .Almost ready to leave the West Coast, but got hung up waiting on a Cargo plane from Heathrow , that had to make a stop in Orlando due to East Coast storms of some kind. Full of merchandise I need. Not drugs, ha ha! Spent the last two days canning cucumbers from the greenhouse while parked on wait. Besides, I knew with you posting the blog, I mean, you do stay on top things people throw at you. I’m not pissed at anyone.

    My entire time in this arena, the theater of people leaving the Church, I can count the times I have actually been pissed off at someone, on one hand. I can hate an act, and not hate the being. So, when I have been pissed off, it’s not for what people have to say or what they believe in. For personal treason . Usually when I argue, it is because I care enough about someone to pay attention to them. I am not Marty’s number one supporter either. His wife is. But I guess folk have a low confront on her right now. She has been nothing but civilized . I’m just parked on wait until tomorrow.

    .I’m kind of shocked at how people are using a simple book review, to get down and dirty and dangerous. Wasn’t the book in itself, a review of someone? Davis Miscavige reacted rather violently. I did not think people out here would follow his path.

    I have been able to stand behind Marty, because he has always been the same person. He is the same person today, as he was two years ago, five years ago. Probably 100 years ago. He formulates new information, and evolves. But he is always the same person. I am always the same person too. I do not understand people that are Joe Smith on Monday, and Julie Rogers on Thursday. Maybe they are multi personality. I understand changing their position. Their attitudes. Their ideas and allegiance. That is hopeful and expected. But to change their beingness, or discount who they were on Monday, on Friday, I do not understand that kind of thing.

    There is nothing I can hope to fix here anymore. I don’t understand these things. People that did not devote a day of their lives, to making the world a better place for anyone,kicking a man in the back that spent over two decades devoted to helping others, and receiving applause. I mean, I don’t understand that. That doesn’t even have anything to do with Scientology anymore. I came up from the gutter, no, the sewer. And I have more decorum that that. So, um, I’m at a loss of words. Finally. I guess people out here are looking for someone, to give them what they and need.

    It doesn’t seem to be Marty today. Although it was it seemed, it was, last Monday. Or me on any day. But I get it now. This is not to say I have been right and anyone else has been wrong. I just don’t get it. These values. This mathematical system. It seems everyone, is going bankrupt under it.

  102. Hemi Benvenisti

    Dear Oracle,
    You know I appreciate you enormously, for being a great thinker and more. I also appreciate and love Marty very much.
    But – 1. reading a blog does not mean having to agree 100% with everything posted in it, not even 50%. That was a slip.
    2. That post was not a book review. Sorry. It was a total attack on the book, claiming it should not have existed even, in the 1st place, and and an unrestrained defamation of its writer(s). Not one single tiny positive or valuable thing in it. Come on, That’s a review? May be. Not for me.
    I am 3/4 through the book, and while not an inimitable Masterpiece I do find parts of it interesting and revealing to me. And I find Ron, according to his own words and “confessions” a complex being, not flat bad or flat good – just like you, Marty, me, and everybody else.
    My humble and deliberately shortened opinion, so as not to create same as what I criticize here.

  103. Almost 14,000 posts on his blog over a period of months before any response was going back to him. But , to answer your question, no..Everything he has done to others amounts to nothing. Whatever has been done to him is unforgivable. He is this theater because he got busted stepping out on his wife.

    What we will call the aberrative personality does the following things:

    1. Everything bad that happened to the preclear was (a) ridiculous, (b) unimportant, (c) deserved.

    2. Everything the preclear and others did to the aberrative person was (a) very important, (b) very bad, (c) irremediable.

    3. Those things which the preclear could do (a) were without real value, (b) were done better by the aberrative personality or by others.

    4. Sexual restraint or perversion.

    5. Inhibition of eating.

    Can’t accuse him of not eating so maybe I am wrong here.

  104. Quote Originally Posted by Rathbun in Memoirs

    Even though it backfired in the case at hand, getting the Armstrong surveillance videos on the public record would serve as a major step in dealing with the more serious government threats of criminal indictments then still extant. The stakes were far higher than merely the Chistofferson case, and there was a great deal of tension in getting the tapes put on the record. We did not want to submit the producer, private eye Gene Ingram, to cross-examination, for fear that he would be forced to disclose anything about the increasing number of operations he was privy to. In the course of coordinating the transportation of the tapes to Portland and into the hands of church coordination attorney John Peterson, Miscavige insisted upon bypassing me and speaking directly to Ingram – something he had not done up to that point in time. I advised him that was a bad idea, should Ingram or he ever be subject to deposition.

    I picked up the phone to make the call to Ingram, and Miscavige came flying at me – tackling me into a sofa and attempting to wrestle the phone from my hand. I would not relinquish my grip even though he was strangling me. I threw my chest out to buck Miscavige from me. He violently stabbed his fist into my chest and said menacingly, “Don’t you ever cross me, motherfucker! I’ll have you declared [excommunicated] in a heartbeat if you ever fuck with me again.” I looked Miscavige in the eye for a moment and considered the weight of that statement. For four years no one on planet earth could communicate to L. Ron Hubbard but through Miscavige – not even his wife. Miscavige was the recipient of personal communications on a weekly basis from Hubbard – but for the extended periods the latter went incommunicado entirely. He was right, he could have me declared in a heartbeat, and all I’d fought for to date would have been for naught. I handed him the phone. He had established himself – much as he had done with Mary Sue Hubbard – as boss buffalo.

  105. Is there anywhere else to go? The circular motion of all things Scientology has little to offer in the way of satisfaction. Is this as good as it gets? In real time, criminality invites an endless cycle of intimidation and counter intimidation. Who of the Scientology world will ever do jail time?

  106. Thanks for pulling this out and posting it. Its a rational review. I wasn’t willing to undergo the crushing mind-fuck of reading the comments on Ortega’s site so had missed this pearl mired down in all the mud. I hope Nora finishes her book for her own sake and it helps her.

  107. Yes – Correction – Starting from “Bunkeroos vs. Scientologists” there were maybe twenty or so internet references and some of them were repeats. The rest of the posts were just trashing Ortega. Interesting. I built my own story and then believed it.

  108. “That doesn’t even have anything to do with Scientology anymore.”

    I think you’re right about that.

  109. Why do they need to do jail time? What would this accomplish…

  110. Ruh-roh. An admission by Marty that David Miscavige DID actually speak to a PI? And from no less than his own book, Memoirs of a Scientology Warrior.

    So, if David Miscavige did actually have a history of speaking to PIs does this mean that the premise of the book review – (the entire book must be false because Miscavige does not speak to PIs) is false?

    And if the premise is false, is the rest of the review false?

    This is kind of like the question ‘Were you lying then or are you lying now!’

  111. Well it is difficult to say why David Miscavige is David Miscavige. He cannot be defined by his heredity or kind of beating while he was a child. Him and his dad are more or less looking alike, kind of middle class red neck.
    But David is far more smart and is also a real fascist. A real one, thetan’s race. It doesn’t explain the take over of scientology by “young turks” who had no real idea of how to audit anyone, which I remind all of you is the only reason for scientology to exist : make a human being more free and more happy with the help of communication. Listen to your fellow man that he can unburden the load of his pains and worries. Basically it is a psychotherapy. And it works quite well when used by wise and well intentioned people.
    Of course this purpose has certainly not much to do with David’s ideas of what he is doing. This is quite accessory, just for pussies he would probably say.
    What do Miscavige really wants ? Marty, do you have an answer ?

  112. Oh, I don’t know… the thought of justice enters my mind every now and again. If I lied to people to get their money in my work I’d be explaining myself to the judge pretty damn quick.
    But you are right I suppose. Miscavige in jail for fraud would accomplish nothing I suppose… except well… I’d be pretty darn happy about it and if it lead to further criminal charges on others in Scientology resulting from the investigation into fraud such as forced abortions, child exploitation, human trafficking etc. I wouldn’t mind that either. However, it’s been tried before and the legal system sort of likes the fact Scientology can get away with those sort of things. Strange world isn’t it?

  113. It is. Thanks for your answer, it helped.

  114. “My motivation in offering the fact-check was to protect Ron from publishing defamations against his own son, and the deleterious emotional and spiritual effects that would ultimately have upon Ron himself.”

    To me, this is probably the best part of Mark’s post.

  115. Oracle – Maybe if the CoS ceased its criminality he’d have less things to write about. Anyhow, have a good trip. It won’t be any fun countering your other comments if your not around. 🙂

  116. “That is, he seeks the abolishment of the so-called Scientology ‘disconnection’ policy.”

    MUCH has been made out of this sentence by Mark’s detractors.

    I think his use of the term so-called, and his putting disconnection in single quote marks was for a reason I haven’t seen even considered, and that is the fact that as far as I know, there actually is no particular policy letter or technical bulletin specifically *named* Disconnection or Disconnection Policy.

    Mark’s statement has been taken to mean that Mark is somehow DENYING there is such a *practice* and I don’t think that’s what he meant at all.

  117. I forgot to add that there *is* a technical bulletin that has the term disconnection as part of the title – HCOB 10 September 83 PTSNess and Disconnection.

    It’s the one that states:

    “To fail or refuse to disconnect from a suppressive person not only denies the PTS (person connected to a Suppressive Person) case gain, it is also supportive of the suppressive – in itself a Suppressive Act. And it must be so labeled.”

  118. I can’t resist, Oracle – another counter. Ortega’s readership numbers will go back up. Even with dwindling numbers in the CoS, there are people blowing the CoS daily. Some of them will find their way to the Underground Bunker or Mike Rinder’s blog.

    Readership and income are different stats. I find it unlikely that Tony and Mike can run daily blogs with a hundred people chipping in five dollars a month or whatever. They both might have anti-scn whales supporting them. This is not heinous. Many people hate the CoS and Scientology and wish it to the history books which is their right to say it and support that effort financially.

  119. Robert Almblad

    Marty, no man or woman has paid a higher price than you in Scientology’s practice of Fair Game.

    Like U2 pilot Gary Powers who posthumously got the coveted CIA Silver Star medal for “demonstrating ‘exceptional loyalty’ while enduring harsh interrogation in the Lubyanka Prison in Moscow for almost two years. I also believe all those involved in Scientology, both in or out, owe you the Silver Star medal for enduring the Fair Game descended upon you and your family these past years. This is regardless of what you wrote in this book review.

    IMHO, your review was not about Ron’s book. (As you know Ron is a long time great friend of mine.) Instead, your readers should see the review of Ruthless in the same way we (those that were old enough at the time) saw Gary Power’s public confession and apology on Russian TV, and replayed on US TV, for his part in the U2 espionage, which only came after months of KGB “interogation”.

    You and Gary are heroes and your Silver Star awaits you anytime you think it is safe enough to accept it. You can now live your life in peace. Godspeed Marty. Godspeed.

  120. I love your psychiatric mind.

  121. Thank you Richard.

    Have no idea though, how Mike Rinder got combined with Tony Ortega though. Mike Rinders stats are up and have been for a long time. His blog is not even similar to Tony Ortega’s Blog.

    Mike Rinder .addresses reports coming from the Church and corrects the false reports. As a usual. He is not a hater or on an ethnic cleansing mission to delete a culture. He does not target people and fair game them for exploring. He is not violated, by people in the pursuit of happiness. And he has plenty of other things he could be doing. He is actually rendering a public service by sorting through all of the false information. Mike has a strong sense of decorum and draws lines in the sand. he does not take daily pleasure in violating people, or anything, except false reports. He has also continued to help people personally when he can, with their problems. In short, he is not a lose cannon building a cottage industry on the backs of innocents by fair gaming them.

  122. Hemi I agree with you, about a reader not needing to agree. But when a “reader” is full on assault, he is asking the author to go away and stop communicating. That is not interest in the blog.

    Marty knew these two people the book is about, and more. He has his OWN STORY with these people too. Which is something you and I do not. So partly, this is his story too. He was contacted about the book and he was contacted by Ron Senior. He was invited and encouraged to become a part of this late story. He shared HIS story. And it is a valid story too. So the review was more panoramic than just the book. It has the same value as any other story.

    I did not feel the need to react to Ron Miscavige’s story. Neither Marty’s story. Seems people out here now are dedicated to who’s story should be told and who’s should be swept under a rug. Do you have any idea how much HEandR I’ve heard about Karen De telling her stories on Youtube? WHY? Because it cuts into income lines for the Independents? They should be explaining to people this is why they are independents, not bitching about a youtube channel.

    Even I, have a story about a musician in Pennsylvania. About a culture of musicians in Pennsylvania. And if I told my story, this entire conversation across the boards, would come to dead stop.

  123. One unrelated incident, in an entire different describe as a “history”.

    It seem the two of you will keep it going until when? Until Marty decides not to have a blog anymore? Is this the end goal?

  124. Twisting and twisting. I never used the word AGREEMENT. Now you have someone else thinking with your twist and asking me about it.

    I never mentioned AGREEMENT or percentages.

    When you can man up and be a grown up in a conversation, I’ll get back to you.

  125. Also Hemi, I never mentioned the word, AGREEMENT. I did not mention anyone needing to agree with Marty, about anything. So I don’t know why this is being laid before me. Except that Chee alter ised my words into a different meaning.

    The point I bought up, was the indication that Marty can not be believed, or is a liar. This is an indication to the group. This is an accusation on Marty. This has nothing to do with agreement. It is a charge being laid on the table. An indication. An item. And the item is, “Marty is a liar”.

    I am just acknowledging that the item has been laid on the table.

  126. My thoughts too.

  127. Tell us the rest. Tell the story of our history.

  128. I love reading his books.

  129. Michael Fairman

    Uh oh, Chee, please point out where in this passage you’ve quoted, when Miscavige speaks to the PI? Seems to me. Marty prevented that from happening, as I read the words.

  130. Hi Marty, I really respect you and admire you for many of the things you have done. I agree with you on the anti-scn front having become the bad xerox copy of Scientology dirty tactics. I also dont admire Ron Miscavige for trying to profit from his past experience in the church. Yet, imho, your review of the book is too slanted in one direction. You dont mention any critical thought whatsover of DM, yet we all know that, even though perhaps he wasnt the monster described by his father, he was STILL responsible for a lot of pain, suffering and financial disaster for many people. By reading your review I get the idea you have or are in the process of switching camps. That of course is something you can do and will not change my opinion of you and of all the help you gave me. Yet, you seem back spinning PR for the Church. If it’s so they have been able to hire a really capable man. You most likely had your reasons. Am I completely wrong? And btw this is your blog and you can publish whatever you want.

  131. Sure thing or “You bet” as they say in Salt Lake City about Mike Rinder. Mike is fair and balanced. It wouldn’t be fair to mention that Ortega might have large donors and Mike would not, since they both run daily blogs, the only two I know of. The point was that as long as the CoS is around I think there will be anti/hostile websites around even after Mike and Tony.

    The last few topics have brought up many viewpoints about groupthink and cult mind even outside of a recognized cult and made me take a look at myself and my attitudes. I don’t know what you mean by “delete a culture”.

  132. “So I continued, informing Ron that Mike or I could tell him that in a combined fifty years of experience in directing Scientology investigative work, David Miscavige NEVER ONCE spoke to a private investigator. It was something he NEVER WOULD do and was far less likely to ever start doing the older he became”

    I don’t know…..that sounds pretty definitive to me. And pretty ‘related’

    Oracle, it wasn’t just one incident. Two other people have said they heard PIs Arnold and Merrick say that they (Arnold and Merrick) spoke to Miscavige.

    Why do you choose to ignore the possibility that maybe, just maybe Marty was wrong? Was Marty with Miscavige 24/7? Wasn’t there a few years when Marty was on the Freewinds?
    How can anyone claim to know what another person does 24/7?

    This kind of reminds me when Tommy Davis said that if LRH had never been injured in the war, he never could have healed himself and everything in Dianetics would be false.

    Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive!

  133. Today Ortega wrote, “We’ve noticed some confusion online, however, about whether that claim was made by Dwayne or Daniel.”

    Where are the documents to back Ortega’s statements? I listened to all the tapes posted by the NY Daily News and Dwayne Powell never said he spoke to DM. Ortega believes the police report is 100 percent accurate. The officer who compiled the report conflated what’s on the tape from the son to the father. Even the police have had problems in admitting the confusion.

    Ortega is conveniently exploiting that confusion to sell a lie. I believe what you said, Marty, because the tapes do not lie and father and son have been mixed up by the cop when writing the report. I think we need to coin a new category for the Ortega types. Tabloids are generally considered the worse type of journalism, yet there is one below that which I call subloid (sub tabloid) because they are worse than tabloids.

  134. True. It simply says “I handed him the phone. ”

    It doesn’t say what Miscavige DID with it after that.

  135. Please don’t tell me Ortega provided the police report as a thought-stopping technique, and is also relying on the simple fact that probably ninety percent of people reading his article won’t actually spend the time to listen to the tapes…


    which is the ONLY way any one individual could verify this for themselves. It’s not like you can note a marker on the tapes of “at 00:15 is when Dwayne Powell *didn’t* say he talked to Miscavige”.

    Of course, someone COULD mark where the other guy says it for everyone to hear- perhaps you, since you’ve listened to all the tapes.

  136. Oh wait, my bad.

    You did that already. “the statement by Daniel Powel is at 37:50.”

  137. @Virginia,

    “I’ve seen some even began to speculate that you *are* Mark using a sock puppet.”

    What a waste of talent. Way too many people out here, Independents, Anti’s and Ex’s, know me, have been to my home, or lived in my home, or speak to me on a daily or weekly basis. Some or many have worked with me. It was beautiful and treacherous lie though. A way to imply Marty is too frightened to have a voice. A way to imply I do not exist.

    Some folk are so eager to invent new lies to feed the Nation of Bedlam. They lay it down with out doing any math. After all, nobody is going to jail for being a lying back stabbing manipulative sneaky ill willed toxic person. It isn’t illegal. Nobody is getting taxed for being an oblivious idiot. For forwarding false information.

    The case entrance for some folk really is a foot up their ass. Then, you know, they pull the claws in a bit. Learn a little R E S P E C T.

  138. “Ortega is conveniently exploiting that confusion to sell a lie.”

    That’s his craft. Normal habits and routines.

  139. Your inner Hamilton Burger is on fire!

  140. “Ortega is conveniently exploiting that confusion to sell a lie.”

    What is the lie?

  141. Oh! Are you in Salt Lake? I will be there for an entire week in October. Bring your wife, we’ll have breakfast. Staying at Kimpton Hotel Monaco. (Pets are welcomed there, and awarded toys and treats at check-in). My bulldog’s hair falls out if I leave him anywhere, so I have to drag him with me. Laughter! Let’s meet up.

  142. I do not agree with this glowing portrayal of Rinder.

    Singling out this point –

    “Mike has a strong sense of decorum and draws lines in the sand…”

    Especially when he has been asked specifically about what Black Ops he ran or knows about on my children or family – like the ones using Dave Lebow.

    Crickets chirping.

    Perhaps he’s just completely ignorant of all black ops having anything to do with the McClaughry’s because there never were any, and it’s really all about my psychiatric/scientology suppressive anti-social condition as to why all these things happened.

    I know! I should go back in scientology and get my case handled and all the bad things will magically stop as a result of the “to the stars” workability of scientology technology.

    Or the Psychiatric version:

    I know! I should go get into therapy to handle my damaged psyche as a result of having been brainwashed by a cult, and with proper medication and psychotherapy I can become a functioning member of society again, and all the bad things will magically stop.

    Said while looking down over top of my glasses.

    That about it?

    (that’s not to you particularly Oracle)

    Or…maybe Mike Rinder could GROW A PAIR and actually tell me what he knows.

  143. I know you exist, and I for one, am glad that you do.

  144. Is, “…who’s should be swept under a rug.”, not a bit of a twist to what is being called into question here? Marty’s review needs some fact checking also.

  145. Yesterday I worked 11 hours. Most of the time because of the nature of the work I was able to follow almost comment by comment the cacophonous outcry at the Ortega blog regarding Ruthless.

    I will never get those 11 hours back. I learned very little except that some were shaming Marty, others were CERTAIN of his motives, others KNEW he was “TURNED” and a scant few (actually one that I can think of Nora Crest said — hmmm — hold on)

    This blog has far fewer comments. As does Mike’s blog. Typically I will read the comments and here I’ll comment but less and less.

    What I’ve asked myself for years though … “what’s in it for him? or her?”

    IF you keep asking that one question until it’s crystal clear – not from projection or wishful thinking or mean spirited thinking it’s as if a jar full of water with glitter it in — that had been stirred up was FINALLY given a chance to let the glitter fall to the bottom and one can see the water for water, the glitter on the bottom as “noise or thoughts or projections” and just SEE. (try it — or use mud if you don’t have glitter/sparkles)

    Without the willingness to QUIET ones mind from the incessant churning of thoughts that we cling so dearly to and allow the seemingly endless attachment to who we THINK we are, should be or will be — it’s going to be
    like a dog chasing it’s tail. Circular.

    Somewhere along the line we have all adopted “who we are” and think this is in stone. Well — it just might not be.

    The only thing I’ve found that is unchanging is not tangible or able to be expressed. And it requires the ability to go within. Over and over.

    A favorite quote of mine by Zen master Suzuki Roshi “Sometimes, just to be alive is enough.”

    Perhaps we should embrace that more.


  146. Pingback: Ruthless Bunker Mentality | Moving On Up a Little Higher

  147. Tropical storm Hermine has worked its way past New Jersey and left behind a cool morning after an exceptionally hot August. I put on my light summer robe to sit on my back porch and have a cup of coffee. I had lost the sash to the robe and was using an old tie instead. Since it was chilly I also put on a lightweight windbreaker over my robe. I hadn’t worn the windbreaker for a couple of months. In the pocket of the windbreaker was my lost sash.

    This brought to mind a recall of the Self Analysis questions and what came to mind was “Recall a time when you found something you thought you had lost.” I got an f/n on that one.

  148. Laughter! How I wish! T’would be a pleasure to meet you. I was born and raised in New Jersey and now live in New Jersey, but I started my scn career at the Salt Lake City mission around 1975. I know what you mean about your dog’s hair falling out – lol. My wife calls our shih tzu the “velcro dog”.

  149. Nice one, Richard.

  150. Even better. I’ve spent a lot of time in New Jersey. The best of all worlds. Lucky you! O.K., I’ll look you up when I’m over that way. Happy trails.

  151. I know people did things in the Church, and under pressure and suppression, they would never do out here.

    When they come out and continue, that’s the red flag.

    Truth is, I was not put in any of those situations myself. Not in Scientology. Under pressure, a woman will squeeze another human being out into this world. Laughter!

    I’m sure if you two got together now, you would end up laughing together. You are both very witty.

  152. Attempted objective: Frame all written and recorded critical evaluations of David Miscavige and Scientology as “Anti-Scientology” and “Anti-Scientology Cult” (ASC).

    End Phenomenon: Expose Mark Rathbuns blog as now OSA owned PR wing.

    Keep Scientology Withering

  153. I’ve rarely read this blog because my impression of Marty when he got out was that he was pushing $cientology that ain’t official $cientology. I also only occasionally read Ortega’s blog any more because there’s a lot of nutcases there. I was, however, under the impression that the PI spoke directly to Lil Davey about the “If he dies, he dies” and not via someone else with the Toxic Dwarf. Seems Ortega wouldn’t mess up a detail like that, but has, which isn’t good. What Lil Davey and the idiots still involved in the cult would love, however, is a war going on between Marty and Tony. Something to keep in mind if, like me, you want the utter destruction of Elwrong Humbug’s evil money machine.

  154. Great pizza in New Joisy – Salt Lake City pizza sucked

  155. It looks like whoever this is, is just mirroring because your point landed a bit too well.

  156. Mark,

    I don’t usually subject myself to going through much of the comments at Tony’s blog, but I did on the one he put out about you.

    I’m not sure you know about this one, and since part of it *could* be taken as some kind of threat, plus it called into question your sanity, I’m bringing it to your attention.


    TX Lawyer Rick Alan Ross •

    “BTW — It’s hard to believe that there wasn’t some kind of settlement regarding the lawsuit filed against Scientology by Monique Rathbun. But I do believe the lawyers regarding not getting paid.”

    If this were true – and I have no reason to believe it is – the Rathbuns will be buried in lawyers very soon.

    I believe Marty’s pathology is his own, not a matter of cash in the bank or under the bed.

    Moderator note: Link removed as received notice it was insecure.

  157. Mark, not sure why that happened with the link, I just tried it and it went right to it, but for your records it was comment #2872013519 and perhaps this full link will work better.

    In case it isn’t clear in my original copy/paste, the comment is BY “TX Lawyer” TO Rick Alan Ross.

  158. Reposted in right spot –

    Mark, not sure why that happened with the link, I just tried it and it went right to it, but for your records it was comment #2872013519 and perhaps this full link will work better.

    In case it isn’t clear in my original copy/paste, the comment is BY “TX Lawyer” TO Rick Alan Ross.

  159. Nicely put.

  160. P.S. On Alanzo’s blog you said you lived in Salt Lake City. Boy oh boy. These rich people with property all over the place. A week here and a week there. Oh well, you’re gone for now so see you when you get back.

  161. Thank you for your kind acknowledgement Virginia. And I am glad for your eternal curiosity. I will leave you with an idea to ponder. I hope it eases the discomfort you embrace with others, as you continue to explore.

    In the beginning of this theater, Hubbard said the source of Scientology, was magic:

    “But mysticism/occultism isn’t our source. Our source, actually, is magic. ”
    Lecture given on 29 January 1958, The History of Clearing by L Ron Hubbard.

    “Scientology has opened the gates to a better World. It is not a psycho-therapy nor a religion. It is a body of knowledge which, when properly used, gives freedom and truth to the individual.” This is from 1954 edition of COHA.

    Hubbard: “MAGIC is a very precise study. Most people think of magic in terms of stage magicians or something of the sort. It’s not. Magic is not. It is a method of producing effects by using for cause the supernatural. 5203C10.

    Hubbard: “If you want to get real tragic, forget it was just magic.”

    It is not sane to harm attack and suppress your fellow man. It is not sane to see a member of your own species, anti symbiotic. To wallow in sadism, ill will. Close conspiracies to destroy others. Anti symbiotic = something is very wrong. Even animals rarely attack members of their own herd or group. Unless it is mating season. Laughter!

    When you try very hard to impart reason and truth. Justice. When you are symbiotic, and you can not bring someone around into that condition. No matter how much you talk. And all you say and do becomes twisted. And the ill will is a continuous stream. And the purpose is to unmock you. And the other does not seem to have theta capabilities or any leaning towards symbiosis.

    You can view that person as being under some kind of enchantment.

    As in, the state of being under a spell; magic. To put someone completely under your control by using magic.

    And then you would be able to understand what you are up against. And you would not need to take it personally. These people do not know you, or me. The ones hell bent on unmocking Marty, have never sat at his kitchen table. Most of them, not all. But this is a very strange magic, and since you are not the source on this enchantment, you are not the target for it’s ill will either. And you can not undo easily in social intercourse, this type of enchantment.

    1325-75; Middle English < Anglo-French, Middle French enchanter < Latin incantāre to put a spell on.

    This is a very magical universe, and only helium does not bind. Except under rare conditions.

    Even Tony Ortega, is a practicing sorcerer. He chants every morning, and he keys people into, "the past", or ill will, or losses, or sadism. And those devoted followers, never have a chance to key out, as long as they read daily. He keeps them re stimulated to keep them under his control and command. And several posters on ESMB, are dabbling in the same black magic arts.

    " It is quite remarkable that the magician attempts directly to use spirits to perform his will. And that is his basic modus operandi. That is his goal in practicing magic.” from a Lecture given on 29 January 1958, The History of Clearing by L Ron Hubbard.

    The attacks on you, on Marty, on me, on well meaning people, are due to enchantment. NOT the "overt motivator sequence" and "pulling it in". If you didn't cast the spell, you didn't cause their condition.

    You can try ARC, reason, information, kindness, and a trillion other things in your tool box to manage it. And continue to be set up for more losses. It is magical and until you understand magic, and enchantment, and their own personal reasons for being subject to black magic arts, you will burn energy without joy.

    There is much good and beautiful magic about us. Drop a seed in the ground, a lime tree comes up! Write a book, and you can cause someone you never met, a route to escape their current conditions. Even if they are locked in prison. Convert fabric into wearable clothes. Dry ingredients into moist warm bread. Curious people, into knowing symbiotic neighbors and friends.

    Anyone who is not curious, or in desire, or exploring, or reaching, and is in the enforce band, parked in enemy or treason conditions, is locked in some kind of enchantment. And really no longer has command over their own destiny and conditions. Their own actions and words.

    Don't be dismayed and disappointed. I know it may sound, "anti symbiotic", to leave the madness parked in very bad conditions, and overwhelmed with lies, ill will, and harmful purposes.

    But if you can, "have faith", you come to consider perhaps it is for the best. We do not know where these beings came from or why they are caught up in this anti ARC, anti truth, anti symbiotic, anti self, state. Perhaps they are screaming "anti anti anti, hate hate hate" so they can be identified from the rest of the species, and parked in long distances from mainstream civilization.

    And this is why the powerful good and well magic, still swirls about us.

    Your curiosity and urge to find truth, and sort through the madness and chaos, your persistence, implies the good magic is what you are a part of.

    And I speak of Marty also when I write this.

    No matter how much you try to resolve confusion and bring order into certain chaos, only that much more will be created by the time you go to sleep and wake up the next morning.

    It's the nature of the enchantment.

    These people are anti self also. And they take care, (or not) of disposing of themselves.

    The anti self is a terrifying magic that can be projected and mirrored onto others. But no time has been wasted. Subjecting yourself to it, can immunize you to it. And help you later, to create works of genius.

    “He only can create the greatest imaginable beauty who has endured all imaginable pangs, for only when we have seen and foreseen what we dread shall we be rewarded by that dazzling, unforeseen, wing-footed wanderer. We could not find him if he were not in some sense of our being, and yet of our own being but as water with fire, a noise with silence. He is of all things not impossible the most difficult, for that which comes easily can never be a portion of our being; soon got, soon gone, as the proverb says. I shall find the dark luminous, the void fruitful when I understand I have nothing, that the ringers in the tower have appointed for the hymen of the soul a passing bell.” — William Butler Yeats

    Happy trails.

  162. From Mike McClaughry –

    Oracle, saw your comment here. Thank you very much for those Hubbard references on Magic. They will be very useful to me in my book Scientology Roots.

    There is much misinformation regarding the true history of all here, and “Magic” is perhaps the most misunderstood of all.

    I was once in a Wiccan shop with just the two owners and my wife, late in the day.

    The female owner asked me: Do you believe in Magic?

    My response was: Define what YOU mean by “Magic”.

    The male owner busted out laughing.

    And then I added: If you mean by “Magic” what they talk about in these books in your store say it is, my answer is no.

    In one of my Scientology Roots chapters I briefly discuss magic, wherein they say Theurgy is using magic words to get aid from “good” spirits (positioned as angels of God), and Gosha is using magic words to compel evil spirits (positioned as demons of the Devil) to one’s bidding. I said basically that there are no magic words for compelling any spirits – it just *seems* that there are.

    As Virginia has said for years now, the only reason scientology appears to work is because YOU work. The same is true for any supposed workability of magic words or incantations. They only APPEAR to work because the particular being that is always the target-of-choice on the other end, makes it work. MAKES it work. If they don’t choose to continue to play along in that way, end of the illusion of control by an outside source.

    “I shall find the dark luminous, the void fruitful when I understand I have nothing…”

    is very appropos.

  163. The book looks very interesting. I look forward to reading it. Some more references of Scientology and magic I made here:

    But certainly, not all. The word “enchantment” popped up in the mid 1200’s. I suspect someone realized words can be restimulative if chanted. Around then, the official Church went to holy hell prohibiting magic or the contemplation of it. I think the priests who became enraged are now parked on ESMB still dramatizing.

  164. Pingback: Ruthless: Rape and Hypocrisy | Moving On Up a Little Higher

  165. I read Ruthless a month or so when the library finally got it. I did think it was an engaging read. After reading this, I’m rather dumbfounded that I didn’t once consider the points you brought up! I read it at face value and didn’t really analyze it. You are absolutely correct in your point about hearsay within the book. He didn’t see many of those things, he heard about them, was told about them, etc. He didn’t take any responsibility for how himself might have shaped and molded David and placed the blame elsewhere. If I hadn’t returned the book, I’d be reading it again to catch all those things.

    At the end he shouldn’t have said he forgives David, he should have said he was sorry.

  166. Wtf kind of reply was that! 🤔

  167. Dubiator , excellent reply, I was wondering the same.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s