Going Clear Movie, Part 2

79 responses to “Going Clear Movie, Part 2

  1. Contrary to the rants by ASC trolls and Jeffrey Augustine in particular, Marty hasn’t “flipped.” He’s approaching a pan-determined viewpoint on this whole scene.

    • On that note, it seems that Ray Jeffrey is no better judge of character than the ASC crowd, based on recent news.

    • Jeffrey Augustine has sadistic personality disorder. He gets his kicks from humiliating and degrading others. This is what brings him true joy. This disorder is characterized by cruel, aggressive, manipulative, and demeaning behavior directed towards others. Abusiveness and violence are common in the sadist’s social relationships, because the sadist lacks concern for people and derives pleasure from harming or humiliating others.

  2. Lawrence Wright may have said he got interested in Scientology because he wanted to get an understanding of what it was, but based on the film, it seemed to me that what he actually wanted to understand was why people got into it and why they stayed in – not what Scientology as a subject consisted of with regard to its principles and practices, which got a very surface treatment. This is partly a problem with the word “Scientology” being used in two very different ways: (1) referring to the organization and its history, and (2) the basic subject itself, the philosophy and tech.

    After I wrote the above, I was curious about Wright’s personal beliefs with regard to religion or spirituality. I found a 2007 interview of him which supports what I noted. Here’s one of his responses from that interview:

    “I guess I’ve always been interested in why people believe what they believe. We live in a country where you can believe anything you want and therefore belief takes a lot of different forms….I myself went through a period of strident religious belief when I was in high school and I suppose that marked me with a certain interest and respect and maybe a little fear of the potency of religious belief. So, that’s been a theme in my work. It took me years to realize that it was playing out in my life. I didn’t realize it was something I was continually investigating, but it’s always been an element in my work.” http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people6/Wright/wright-con1.html

    Ironically, Scientology could shed a lot of light for Wright on the above.

  3. Yeah, pan-determined. Me too. Pan-determined to get Rinder on his OSA activities against me, both with the Miss Bloodybutt attack, and the ABC middle-Managers Op to end my broadcast career at 49.

  4. IMO, the most wisdom ever reported about Scientology revolves around the fact that everyone seems to experience it differently. It seems to come down to personal perception of the factual experience living over time as a member. The real life images are mostly lost to the “never ins” who need to use emotion or intellect to grasp them.
    Therefore, it is absurd to reject the Xenu story simply because it does not match current scientific reality. It is can only be rejected by an analysis of the psychological basis of Scientology. This psychological basis is carefully hidden by emotions surrounding the subject.
    I read “Going Clear” making huge allowances for Wright’s “never in” status. His book is an adventure into a subject which he only treats as an object. If Paul Haggis and Leah Remini reject Xenu, that is only due to an inability to grasp Hubbard’s underlying meaning. Thus it all reduces in the end to personal experience. Xenu is nothing more than a universal historical symbol.

    • Overpopulation on inhabited planets by a dominant species might be a universal theme. In 1800 there were 1 billion humans walking the earth. In 1960 there were 3 billion and today the number is approaching 8 billion. Estimates vary on the carrying capacity of spaceship earth.

      • Hi Richard,
        Yes, that certainly would be a universal theme. The infinity of space would also allow seeds to mature. I can see where Hubbard tended to lean on the old occult interpretations. They are very logical.

        • George, did you ever think about the fact that a person not capable of empathy, would not be able to audit the OT levels? You need to be able to feel others, understand and share the feelings of another, to even use that technology in any way.

        • Hi George – You presented some very convincing references to the occult nature of the OT levels on past topics here. It would be a bit of an esoteric but interesting study when you publish your research. I think future investigators would find your research interesting and useful.

          • Thanks Richard. I am actively researching Hubbard’s ties to Russia. No current political angle here because Hubbard was anti-Communism. But Hubbard was heavily influenced by Blavatsky on the Occult side and by Gurdjieff on the Dianetics side. In fact, there is a very slight case to make in saying that Hubbard was not in the American tradition but in the Russian tradition. There are also a few ties to Russia in Hubbard’s treatment of the Sea Org.

            • George, is there any philsophy in all of history that doesn’t have similarties to some other philsophy before it? It seems to me that there are universal insights that appear and reappear over time.

              • Or, we could say there are recurring worldviews, rather than insights.

                I feel the attempt by many to paint Hubbard as not being original is a meme in the anti-Scientology culture – which has as its purpose the intention to make nothing of his work. Your views may have some other basis, but I’m curious about your answer to the question in my comment above.

                • Marildi,
                  I never try to be-little Hubbard or Scientology. I try to put them in balanced perspective.

              • Hi Marildi,
                I wrote a long reply but it got stuck in cyber space.
                In essence, Hubbard’s originality centers on the e-meter.

                • Okay, George, I appreciate the attempt. I sort of see what you’re saying about the e-meter, but there’s a large part of Scientology that doesn’t involve its use at all.

                  More to the original point, however, you wrote above:

                  “…Hubbard was heavily influenced by Blavatsky on the Occult side and by Gurdjieff on the Dianetics side. In fact, there is a very slight case to make in saying that Hubbard was not in the American tradition but in the Russian tradition.”

                  I looked both of them up and found the following about Madam Blavatsky’s Theosophy:

                  “Associating it closely with the esoteric doctrines of Hermeticism and Neoplatonism, Blavatsky described Theosophy as ‘the synthesis of science, religion and philosophy’, proclaiming that it was reviving an ‘Ancient Wisdom’ which underlay all the world’s religions.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helena_Blavatsky

                  Based on the above, Blavatsky herself could be said to have been “heavily influenced” and be accused of “plagiarizing” with respect to the religion she founded – which went way beyond Russian influences. The same goes for Gurdjieff, according to the following:

                  “Gurdjieff gave new life and practical form to ancient teachings of both East and West. For example, the Socratic and Platonic emphasis on ‘the examined life’ recurs in Gurdjieff’s teaching as the practice of self-observation. His teachings about self-discipline and restraint reflect Stoic teachings. The Hindu and Buddhist notion of attachment recurs in Gurdjieff’s teaching as the concept of identification. His descriptions of the ‘three being-foods matches that of Ayurveda, and his statement that ‘time is breath’ echoes jyotish, the Vedic system of astrology. Similarly, his cosmology can be ‘read’ against ancient and esoteric sources, respectively Neoplatonic and in such sources as Robert Fludd’s treatment of macrocosmic musical structures.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Gurdjieff#Reception_and_influence

                  As we can see, Hubbard wasn’t alone in “standing on the shoulders of giants” – discovering truth by building on previous discoveries. In fact, that is the usual course of events.

                  On top of all that, Hubbard’s practical developments were based on long and thorough primary research, as described by Marty in his video Going Clear Part 2. Marty had tried to get Wright to look at the sheer volume of “two or three lectures a day, 60-90 minutes, substantive – constantly evolving and changing over a fifteen-year period non-stop from 1950 to mid-1960s…referring in there, in much of it, to workshops and seminars that he was involved in experimenting with Dianetics and Scientology.”

                  In other words, Hubbard wasn’t just “pontificating off the top of his head. [The processes of Dianetics and Scientology are] all predicated on drills and techniques and things that he’s experimenting with and working with between these lectures.”

                  So, considering all of the above, I don’t see how we can oversimplify and minimize Hubbard’s life work as “based on the occult” – or facilely attribute it all to teachings that came before him.

                  • Thanks Marildi,
                    My longer comments do not go into the queue.
                    Hubbard’s involvement with the Occult is, IMO, the key to his personality and to his religion. This is very objective. It takes a lot of careful research to find this out and to track it. Wiki is only a starting point.

                    • Thank you, George. Good answer. Then tell me this: does “the occult” have a negative connotation in your view? Or would the fact that it influenced Hubbard and Scientology be a criticism of either?

              • Yes, I do think there are universal insights that appear and re-appear.
                I have estimated that ideas like Scientology seem to re-appear every three centuries. This is not to put down Hubbard or Scientology. It just seems to be the cycle.

                • Thanks. That’s what I was trying to say: The fact that Hubbard expressed ideas that others had already expressed isn’t a put-down – it’s the usual. But many critics frame it as “plagiarizing” or “stealing” from others, meaning that Hubbard hadn’t come up with ideas of his own, independently. He also built on the ideas of others which indicated as truth to him – just as those others had done.

                  Interesting what you say about the same ideas reappearing every three centuries.

    • Mike Rinder, Leah Remini, and Paul Haggis are ridiculous people.

    • Sure. Okay.

    • The thing about Hubbard’s Xenu writings is that he never says it is the reader’s incident.

      What if everyone who read a story about Vietnam, decided Vietnam never happened because they were not there?

      You can still find some people who were in Vietnam, and they would have something to say about it.

      Most people if not all, exploring Scientology were not in Hiroshima when we dropped the atomic bomb. But that does not mean it did not happen. And if you were to go to Japan, you could find people that were there when it did happen. And some would probably have some charge to address.

      If you had ancestors or family in Japan, it is possible you could have some feelings of empathy and understanding about these things, if you were sensitive to these people’s disturbance.

      For me, the mysteries about Scientologists do not lie within things Hubbard wrote or said or did. It is why they were there, to begin with if it was not to explore the possibilities and potentials therein.

      I really think Hubbard got this admin scale wrong when he wrote it the first time. Which is alright with me. I am not Hubbard and he is not me. But I think PURPOSE is senior most to any endeavor. Why would you even have goals if not to fulfill the purpose?

      Not everyone was even curious. Some people were just lonely. Some people were just needy. Some people just wanted a new identity. Some people just wanted applause. Some people just wanted to get laid. Some people just wanted to get paid. Some people wanted to dominate. Some people were afraid of it. Some people got dragged in by their parents. Some people needed a green card. Some people needed connections. I have even met people that made it all the way up the bridge because they were competing with a relative or a business partner. I spent years having conversations with people, watching them and listening.

      I know of a guy that became curious about Scientology, came to Flag and did everything on the bridge in just under three years, left and was never heard from again. He was only interested in the Scientology adventure, nothing else.

      I saw people who spent years involved in Scientology community and never did a service that entire time.

      The Scientologists are all different, no two are the same. The same as if you took and few thousand from around the world and packed them in a stadium.

      Not one of them, or even one group of them, define the total. That would be like saying, one Japanese person, represents the entire Japanese culture.

      But we have people that are prone to racism, discrimination, ethnic cleansing. Not every even understands these things, or them either.

      We have people who think the world revolves around their ass. So whatever their viewpoint is, it should be the entire nations.

      The thing is PURPOSE. It is not about the person’s culture, race, sex, wealth, it is about their purpose. And where you find someone that hates an entire culture, it is not just one culture, believe me. Hate is a purpose. Destroy, is a purpose. Disturb, is a purpose. It is not about the people or ideas being harmed. People tend to land on their purpose line. There are plenty of places and groups all around the world for a person to manifest their purpose, it really does flow through time.

      I think one of the most basic ethics formulas, probably the enemy condition, could have been, “Find out why you are”.

      “Who”, you know, we are just looking at an identity and the “who” rests on a “why” anyway.

      We just live in a culture where the motive is not considered until there is a crime scene. People tend to list and project in those areas and don’t trust themselves enough to think along those lines. It is very difficult for someone to say, “I don’t know”. So they take items given to them and they can be wrong items. But if you can not tolerate mystery, you will not become curious.

      • Went OT8 in three years? Wow!

      • Well written Oracle,
        My FSM’s put me in competition with others at Friday night OT meetings.
        This motivated me up the bridge.
        You have broad experience concerning the Scientology public.
        In the end, I think Hubbard tried to preach a few mysteries which he thought he owned or discovered. I was ignorant and he spouted the wrong information to me. All I ever wanted to hear from him was his connection to the Occult. As a Catholic, I never read the forbidden books that Hubbard seemed to enjoy so much. I would recommend that there should be somewhere a pre-Scientology awareness course which links Hubbard to the past. It would help a lot of people such as myself to avoid his teachings.

        • Sounds like you were denied an item, and also had items forced on you that were not yours.

          Items in itself has been a fascinating branch of knowledge for me. It is like picking apart gaslighting.

          Did you ever think about Dante’s Inferno with the levels of Hell being the first tone scale?

          • Fraud and treachery are at the very bottom.

          • “Did you ever think about Dante’s Inferno with the levels of Hell being
            the first tone scale” Are you saying that the tone scale used in Scientology was derived from Dante?

            • No. The tone scale used in Scientology was Hubbard’s. But he did not create the first tone scale. Dante did. There are also many things to understand about the tone scale. A person’s condition is senior to their tone. I have known many low toned people who are not treasonous. And I have known high toned people who are as wobbly as a seedling in a hurricane.

              I prefer Dante’s scale because he is based on motive, and conditions such as fraud, treason etc. It is more of a “motive scale”. But a true tone musically. But it only encompasses the lower motives. And it all begins with doubt. Which is usually the result of being gaslighted. This is how toxic people can drive someone into hellish mental states.

              The levels of hell and the levels of purgatory indicate conditions.

              The circles of Hell:

              First Circle (Limbo) Doubt.

              Second Circle (Lust) Does not have to be sexual. Can be for applause.

              Third Circle (Gluttony) Selling children for sex is as gluttonous as it gets.

              Fourth Circle (Greed) Full regard for self. Zero regards for others.

              Fifth Circle (Anger)

              Sixth Circle (Heresy) Just read Tony Ortega’s blog and ESMB.

              Seventh Circle (Violence) Just look at the comments section of these ASC forums and blogs.

              Eight Circle (Fraud) Need I say anything more? Here is Ortega as the poster boy. The world’s greatest authority on Scientology? And he has aiders and abettors.

              Ninth Circle (Treachery) Thick. Very thick. TREASON.

              The levels of purgatory:

              First Stage (Stubbornness) Fixed ideas and fixed conditions.

              Second Stage (Repentant) Self-denial. Shame for the life you have lived.

              Third Stage (Pride) This is where rank, certs, status, celebrity, and royalty become priorities over reason.

              Fourth Stage (Envy)

              Fifth Stage (Wrath)

              Sixth Stage (Sloth)

              Seventh Stage (Avarice)

              Eighth Stage (Gluttony)

              Ninth Stage (Lust)

              These are motive scales. And they map out human twistedness and torture. Who cares how “cheerful” someone is while they are getting their cheer from stabbing you in the back? Sadists derive cheer from the misery they cause others to endure.

              Again, I think Hubbard had not tapped into PURPOSE when he laid out the tone scale.

              I think it hit him much later on in his research, And that is when he mapped out the purpose rundowns. He went from goals auditing to purpose auditing.

              We have been pioneers in this exploration. And not everyone was in pioneer mode. Some folk was at Disney world paying for a ride. A rank. A celebrity. A title. A status. And when they had no more use for those things, they were out the door. Violently.

              Given your history and education, the fact that you spent your life working to learn and know, you do not belong to the group of people looking for a joy ride. 15 minutes of fame. A stairway to heaven. High fives and pats on the back.

              Some people become violent when they have to start thinking for themselves. Doing for themselves. As spectators, they know how to applaud or boo. And they move from theater to theater claiming a seat in the audience. It is just street theater. And when they come upon a scene where nobody cares about their applause, they have a violent reaction.

              Now, the sadism is very thick out here in the ASC community, so I want to illustrate how vital PURPOSE is.

              What if someone who has been taking pleasure in their OWN misery, rises above that onto the third flow. They rise above taking pleasure in their own suffering, but then they take pleasure in other people’s suffering? Do you see, if you can not address this sordid purpose, you could clear someone and then they would just go out and wallow in making others suffer?

              So, a motive scale would be highly beneficial.

              The tone scale? A sociopath can be enthusiastic. A sadist can be cheerful. All you need to wipe out an entire culture is a conservative ethnic cleansing participant. Conservative move with the status quo. The party plan.

              • But if you took a person who derived their pleasure from suffering, and you took that suffering away from them, they would just switch over to deriving their pleasure from making others suffer, and setting them up for losses.

                One of the reasons I find Marty Rathbun trustable, is that he lifts others up, and he is not bound by other reasons, whims or hidden agendas. He does not devote himself to tearing others down. He devotes himself to empowering people and lifting them up. And if this pisses other people off, he really doesn’t pander to their unholy motives for applause.

                That is personal integrity.

                • As for the degenerates, they have to live somewhere. They are parked here. One can become disturbed about it. But think of all the societies and civilizations they are not parked in, that are probably better neighborhoods for better civilizations. That they are not polluting.

              • Oracle,
                Thanks for the summary. I always regarded the Tone Scale as a limited tool. Your comment that he missed “PURPOSE” is valid. It explains why he had to come out with the false purpose rundowns late in the game.

        • But I do think if a person extends their faith in God, or the Gods, or in higher powers, or a higher power, one can figure out the good reason in every thing that happens to them. Whatever seems like a setback, if you have that faith or that co existence and trust, you can believe whatever you are experiencing is for a good reason, and will benefit you in some manner up the road someplace. Sometimes you just have to wait for it to become apparent to you in another moment. It is within the symbiotic relationship you have with those higher powers.

          The word, “Hell” comes from the meaning “to hide” or “cover up”. If you are in a co existence with higher powers, you can never hide from them. And there is nothing you can cover up from them. If you fall out of favor and are no longer in a symbiotic co existence with them, you have been abandoned to your own means and only then, does hiding and covering up become a tradition.

          • By the way, there is no mention of a Hell in Biblical teachings until the release of the “new testament”. “Golden Age of Religion”. Laughter!

            There were early references on being cast into “lakes of fire”. Also known as volcanos.

            No doubt some people think they have already been “cast into hell”, which would explain their ghoulish and demonic social intercourse. The fraud and treachery. And their contributions to a Hellish society. The constant efforts to remain in hiding (covert operators) and cloaked.

            But if there wasn’t a whole lot more Heaven on this planet than Hell, there would have been no evolution.

            But for me, this explains why some people feel compelled to harm attack and suppress evolution. New knowledge and insight is part of evolution. The intolerance of evolution is where we find the ethnic cleansing groups and clusters. The anti symbiotic. And they can lead the intolerant into some hellish mind sets who thereby create Hellish conditions.

            I actually did not agree with anything Hubbard ever wrote about anti socials and suppressive until about six months ago, when it became a wide open forefront for social survival.

            https://theartofcharm.com/empowerment/cut-toxic-people-life/

            http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/relationships/friendships/how-to-remove-toxic-people-from-your-life

            http://www.huffingtonpost.com/susie-moore/love-and-relationships_b_5266458.html

            http://www.thepragmaticparent.com/letting-go-of-toxic-people/

            Even ABC news ran a special on disconnecting from demonic influences.

            http://abcnews.go.com/Lifestyle/signs-time-cut-toxic-family-ties/story?id=27278012

            This is an evolution.

            Narcissists, sadists, these kind of people are becoming common knowledge now. Toxic personalities. Sociopaths. It is becoming common knowledge, not specialized knowledge.

            This is evolution.

            Basically, from where I am viewing, Hubbard just pointed out things to people. People like him are considered dangerous to thought police, gatekeepers, those that remain hidden and cloaked in synthetic beingness.

            But this is ancient Biblical knowledge just coming into common use. Disconnecting from toxic people, distancing yourself from anti humanity and anti symbiotic forces is ancient biblical teaching:

            Ephesians 4:31-32 – Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamor, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice: And be ye kind one to another.

            This is ancient information. yet, you can find people today bitterly fighting this advice. I myself, just really had to immerse myself in that culture before it became real. The evil. And mainly, it was the gaslighting I was able to observe, that opened my eyes. Contact assists for days and weeks with it. Those people are not protesting about evil, they are inventing evil. When Marty points it out, he gets accused of being evil. This is how they operate. But he is only forwarded ancient Biblical advice. And there are people who fear this evolution because they know what is going to happen to them once the general population of Earth, can figure them out. No matter what identity they are parked in.

          • Speaking of the eighth dynamic (lol) here’s another tidbit from Ken Wilber’s Integral Life blog.

            “We live in a universe that is, formally, without a given center – it is a universe where any thing or event can be taken as the center of the universe, and everything else related to its location.” Ken Wilber

            It follows that a “formless God” would probably choose to be at “the center” of everything which is between my ears and everyone else’s ears. How’s that for some armchair metaphysical speculation? lol

            • I think that is a tremendously valid insight.

            • Formless God was a term in Wilber’s writing which I liked. It related to an experience I once had which I had described as the “Presence of the Holy Spirit.” That presence was neither male nor female, yet very real and very there. Formless God is an apt description.

              I’ve read that some neuroscientists are attempting to zero in on and isolate the part of the brain which originates peak/religious experiences. If they show up in my area I’ll volunteer to be a guinea pig. I could go for some more free peak experiences!

        • Why would you want anyone avoid somebody’s teachings? Seems like covert censorship to me.

          Christ I’ve read Mein Kampf and I never embraced Nazism nor did I embrace Communism by reading Das Kapital and the Communist Manifesto.

          I also read Freud’s Outline of Psychoanalysis and suffered no ill effects from doing so. I could go on and on about all the books I’ve read that had nothing to do with Scientology.

          Maybe you should concentrate on expanding your horizons instead of hiding in some intellectual cave of some kind.

          • The apple of knowledge means displacement into Hell. According to biblical myths. And Eve is the source of all misery.

            Nobody gets a life until they pass through a woman’s thighs yet, even in the Bible only God is acknowledged as the creator. Women are to be feared and mistrusted and generally carry a planetary declare of constant treason according to Biblical teachings. Knowledge is forbidden in many corridors.

            One needs to walk a middle path when reading the Bible also. It is a series of proposed social policies which have been highly beneficial. All of our current laws in society are based on the ten commandments.

            But knowledge and women have gotten an unfair position in these teachings.

            • Good point Oracle.

              One could ask that if sex was considered the “original sin” then why did he allegedly create man and woman?

              • Original sin, also called ancestral sin, is the Christian doctrine of humanity’s state of sin resulting from the fall of man, stemming from Adam and Eve’s rebellion in Eden, namely the sin of disobedience in consuming from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. It is the sin of disobedience.

                But the original sin was disobedience, noncompliance. The ability to escape domination.

                Sex was so heavy upon women they were parked into a GPM that the only way to be “holy” was to conceive without having sex. Conceive as a virgin. The virgin Mary was the Jackie Kennedy of the Bible.

                The sexual “sins” cast upon women were the result of greed and real estate. Women were property, part of the estate. Not even permitted to handle money until recently (1870). Men needed to define their heirs and offspring to regulate real estate and possessions. So women needed to be wholly obedient to keep the ledgers straight. Otherwise, the accounting (rightful heirs) got messed up. But it was all connected to wealth, possession and real estate. Possession is still 90% or nine-tenths of the law, meaning that ownership is easier to maintain if one has possession of something, or difficult to enforce if one does not.

                But women are generally feared for the magical power of “charm” which can disarm men. But be clear, this power goes both ways. And it is simply a form of ARC that can free people from fixed conditions. Fixed ideas. Fear. Doubt. Well, Hell in fact. ARC can bring down the estate if it has been built on enforcement, and one of the pillars blows out of enforcement and into curiosity and desire.

                Most of the ten commandments are wealth protectors.

                Honor thy father and thy mother
                Thou shalt not kill
                Thou shalt not commit adultery
                Thou shalt not steal
                Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour
                Thou shalt not covet (neighbor’s house)
                Thou shalt not covet (neighbor’s wife)
                Thou shalt not covet (neighbor’s servants, animals, or anything else)

                It is easier for people that have no wealth, or tangible assets, or for desperate people, to disregard the commandments (social policy).

                But the ten commandments are about treating others with respect, creating a civilization where people can be, do and have.

                Thousands of years have passed and we still have people on an agenda of can’t be, can’t do, and can’t have. The ASC community regards anyone that has anything as a “whale”. And they are fair gamed and their children are stalked harassed harmed attacked and suppressed. Tony Ortega has been on a rampage for years as the town crier reporting Monique took a dollar from someone. By the way, I hope he will be picking up the legal tab for the Rathbuns, as he is the one who has asserted a pay out was taken and published it until a woman in Australia who never crossed paths with the Rathbuns was putting up “an open letter” interrogatory web site on Monique. This is the purpose of the ASC community. To attack people for being, doing, or having. And it has nothing to do with Scientology at all. They all have a history of doing just this, they just had different targets. But the mode of social intercourse has always been a position in gaslighting. And a solid position on Dante’s motive scale. And when they have no power to oppress others or run can’t haves, can’t be, can’t do on others, they will invert upon themselves. The word “motivator” comes from MOTIVE.

                motive. mid-14c., “something brought forward,” from Old French motif “will, drive, motivation,” noun use of adjective, literally “moving,” from Medieval Latin motivus “moving, impelling,” from Latin motus “a moving, motion,” past participle of movere “to move” (see move (v.)). WILL. the mental power used to control and direct your thoughts and actions, or a determination to do something, despite any difficulties or opposition.

                Will, is also tied into estate matters.

                Old English *willan, wyllan “to wish, desire; be willing; be used to; be about to” (past tense wolde), from Proto-Germanic *willjan (source also of Old Saxon willian, Old Norse vilja, Old Frisian willa, Dutch willen, Old High German wellan, German wollen, Gothic wiljan “to will, wish, desire,” Gothic waljan “to choose”).

                The Germanic words are from PIE root *wel- (2) “to wish, will” (source also of Sanskrit vrnoti “chooses, prefers,” varyah “to be chosen, eligible, excellent,” varanam “choosing;” Avestan verenav- “to wish, will, choose;” Greek elpis “hope;” Latin volo, velle “to wish, will, desire;” Old Church Slavonic voljo, voliti “to will,” veljo, veleti “to command;” Lithuanian velyti “to wish, favor,” pa-velmi “I will,” viliuos “I hope;” Welsh gwell “better”).

                Compare also Old English wel “well,” literally “according to one’s wish;” wela “well-being, riches.” The use as a future auxiliary was already developing in Old English. The implication of intention or volition distinguishes it from shall, which expresses or implies obligation or necessity. Contracted forms, especially after pronouns, began to appear 16c., as in sheele for “she will.” In early use often -ile to preserve pronunciation. The form with an apostrophe (‘ll) is from 17c.

                Old English will, willa “mind, determination, purpose; desire, wish, request; joy, delight,” from Proto-Germanic *wiljon- (source also of Old Saxon willio, Old Norse vili, Old Frisian willa, Dutch wil, Old High German willio, German Wille, Gothic wilja “will”), related to *willan “to wish” (see will (v.1)). The meaning “written document expressing a person’s wishes about disposition of property after death” is first recorded late 14c.

                Old English willian “to determine by act of choice,” from will (n.). From mid-15c. as “dispose of by will or testament.” Often difficult to distinguish from

                Dante’s motive scale is a scale of WILL. He pushed religion into the future with that. Since, do as they will, is pretty much the whole of the law. When you have people willing knowledge as dangerous, well by God, the law is, it becomes dangerous.

                Where you have people willing others to be honest, fair and just. This becomes the law. And you see our laws are all based on the ten commandments. Every single one of them, except tax laws. There is nothing religious about taxation. Even under the banner of enforced “donations”. These laws are just willed into being. And actually, propell people to bear false witness (on their tax returns) to avoid the extortion. But this is the basic reason why governments do not tax Churches. Those people live by biblical law, not congressional law. They answer to a higher power than politicians. And even corrupt politicians, in this country anyway, do not cross those boundaries.

                At the end of the day, if you answer to a higher power than a politician, you are permitted the original sin in tax court. Non-compliance to lesser, perennial powers.

      • The Oracle wrote:

        “I think one of the most basic ethics formulas, probably the enemy condition, could have been, “Find out why you are”.

        That’s fantastic, and it’s answerable, too, unlike the original.

        Well done!

    • I think “purpose”, is also very much connected to time. Some people explored Scientology because of “the past”. Trying to reconcile “the past”. Some people are dealing with the present. I was not curious and never would have spent half an hour exploring Scientology for reasons of the past or present.

      Everyone exploring Scientology is rolling into the future. And those possibilities are infinite. To decide there is nothing in Scientology worth knowing, against a backdrop of endless possibilities, is wasteful to me.

      I imagine in between lives, there will be some effort to “remember” something they learned there. But only when it is in “the past”, they are usually parked in.

    • George,
      For years it has been openly published in Scientology magazines and elsewhere that LRH once stated that reading OT3 materials prematurely can re-stimulate pneumonia. Doing basic word clearing one would find that pneumonia is caused by bacteria (and viruses); further research on bacteria would reveal that bacteria is the first independent life form on earth. It seeks to survive and can survive in very, very extreme temperatures. Bacteria (and viruses) quickly reproduce and can cluster in groups to form colonies and conquering armies with a postulated mission. There are now many different species with special postulated abilities. They will eventually come in contact, learn their enemies weaknesses and hand on the knowledge to their next generation to overcome any enemy (like antibiotics) that attempts to destroy them. 3-6% of a persons body weight is made up of bacteria, they are ON and IN OUR BODIES, trillions of billions of them. Many modern scientists now believe that these independent life forms came to earth on frozen comets and asteroids, which bombarded early earth. LRH found this data in the early 50’s while doing his auditing research. Today, viruses and bacteria are a leading cause of many cancers and are winning the fight as cancer, bacterial infections and deadly viruses are markedly on the rise. Food for thought about the Xenu story and space.

  5. Observation:

    I get your judgements up to a point. I see how people can simply hate Scientology and want it to go down. But isn’t it true that the doctrines of hate and violence against critics have harmed people? And that these real harmings of people deserve outrage?

    Of course it’s true, beyond a doubt.

    Marty, I think that you could make a better argument if you actually used the balanced view that you claim others do not have.

    By simply making everyone wrong and having sleazy ulterior motives, you are doing what you criticize.

    You have not conceded or had compassion for one human tragedy revealed in any of these media.

    It is simply an untruth that every single story is blown out of proportion.

    The very fact that you broad stroke all of these medias with bad intentions only reveals that you are doing the exact mirror image of what you are criticizing.

    The fact that you do not allow one fact of abuse to be accepted as true, but seek to dead agent everyone, is the exact thing you criticize in others.

    You can say that Gibney and Wright with their understanding of Scientology wanted to dead agent Scientology. They only wanted the dirt as you say.

    But you are doing the exact thing. I know you know of actual abuse and family hardships caused by the social attack doctrines and disconnection.

    So the only logical conclusion I can come to is that you are not interested in a balanced view. You are interested in dead agenting.

    You are not having a balanced view by dead agenting. You are being the person you are criticizing; projection.

    Hate on any level is destructive. Hate for Scientology and Scientologists or Hate for people who hate Scientology.

    It’s all the same. If you want a balanced view; be balanced. Otherwise you are still in the dichotomy game.

    • Footnote:

      By no means am I above this definition as well. I also project myself and define the blank screen of circumstance with meaning thereby.

      Nothing exists in the world that does not find its inception in our thoughts; known or unknown; conscious or subconscious.

      “The world is as you are”

      Ramana Maharshi

  6. I meant this entry for this thread. Please do not post the one for last video. That is, if this even makes it past qual:-)

    Observation:

    I get your judgements up to a point. I see how people can simply hate Scientology and want it to go down. But isn’t it true that the doctrines of hate and violence against critics have harmed people? And that these real harmings of people deserve outrage?

    Of course it’s true, beyond a doubt.

    Marty, I think that you could make a better argument if you actually used the balanced view that you claim others do not have.

    By simply making everyone wrong and having sleazy ulterior motives, you are doing what you criticize.

    You have not conceded or had compassion for one human tragedy revealed in any of these media.

    It is simply an untruth that every single story is blown out of proportion.

    The very fact that you broad stroke all of these medias with bad intentions only reveals that you are doing the exact mirror image of what you are criticizing.

    The fact that you do not allow one fact of abuse to be accepted as true, but seek to dead agent everyone, is the exact thing you criticize in others.

    You can say that Gibney and Wright with their understanding of Scientology wanted to dead agent Scientology. They only wanted the dirt as you say.

    But you are doing the exact thing. I know you know of actual abuse and family hardships caused by the social attack doctrines and disconnection.

    So the only logical conclusion I can come to is that you are not interested in a balanced view. You are interested in dead agenting.

    You are not having a balanced view by dead agenting. You are being the person you are criticizing; projection.

    Hate on any level is destructive. Hate for Scientology and Scientologists or Hate for people who hate Scientology.

    It’s all the same. If you want a balanced view; be balanced. Otherwise you are still in the dichotomy game.

    • Personally I don’t see anyone “dead agenting” the media other than themselves by proven lies and falsehoods.

      As far as I see it Marty is just dissecting Wright’s book, Gibney’s so called “documentary” and Remini’s “Reality” show by pointing out the inconstancies in their narrative.

      Maybe if they just stuck the facts instead of alter and distort them beyond recognition he and those of us commenting on his blog wouldn’t be here.

      Also how can there a “balanced” view if the other side of the argument is never presented?

      By the way the one who committed the most violence against critics as the head of OSA is now one of Church of Scientology’s biggest critics.

      How does that work?

      Much like many Governments he creates the conditions that he complains about.

      For example it was Mike Rinder who reinstituted the policy of disconnection and committed the most disreputable acts against critics. Just ask Tom Klemesrud who occasionally comments he.

    • Brian, I understand what you’re saying about balance, in and of itself. However, I don’t think that is the basic criticism. The fact that Wright and Gibney don’t give a balanced view is just a symptom of the real issue – which is that they are forwarding a pre-set narrative – and to that degree their work is slanted away from truth, since the “facts” have to suit the narrative.

      Marty also pointed out that this occurs with documentaries and the media in general, and in my view this is the bigger point to take away.

      The main question to ask about any narrative that gets forwarded is – what is the ultimate objective? If profit is part of the picture, with regard to those who are sponsored to do the forwarding, then who are the sponsors – and what is their actual motive? This would be the most significant factor in the anti-Scientology narrative. As an example, with regard to the agenda to have the church’s tax exemption revoked, based on the forwarded assertion that Scientology isn’t religion, I wonder what ulterior motive might be involved. .

      • I think the motive is twofold:

        Reveal abuse and make a profit. I see nothing wrong with any of these motives.
        I find it hypocritical for Scientologists to decry being motivated to make money.
        It’s so strange to hear someone try to destroy the character of others who make money to survive while Scientology has always been about stats up; which means money in.

        When I first stared posting on Marty’s years ago he replied to a post I did by replying that I was a wiseman.

        My post those years ago, verify my consistency in viewpoint, that I shared in my recent post on “Rinders” blog called: Battlefields: Scientology vs Critics; Can Decency Win?; was:

        Just audit and make happy people. Stop attacking people. Just help people and that will change Scientology’s PR.
        It will take a long time to do this. But first Scientologists need to stop attacking critics and just help people. Happy people is a better weapon that hating haters and dead agenting them.

        Is it even possible that Scientologists can remove from their cognitive faculties: ruin utterly?

        • Brian: “I find it hypocritical for Scientologists to decry being motivated to make money.”

          Since this is a reply to my post, it doesn’t look like you duplicated it. I said nothing about there being a problem with making a profit (or revealing abuse, for that matter). You seemed to have missed the actual point. Here’s what I wrote, with caps for emphasis:

          “If profit is part of the picture, with regard to those who are sponsored to do the forwarding, then WHO ARE THE SPONSORS – and what is their ACTUAL motive? This would be the most significant factor in the anti-Scientology narrative.”

          But putting that aside, the potential problem with being motivated to make money is that it can be the source of blatant dishonesty. Right now it’s “popular to jump on Scientology,” as Marty put it in the next video (Part 3), and this is the reason all the negative gets emphasized and even embellished while the positive gets left out. This is what “sells” – which is the reason (or one reason) this is the ASC narrative.

          The other thing besides profit as a motive is all the accolades given to those who jump on Scientology. Marty pointed that out too, and it can easily be observed.

        • I think marildi’s point was that the fundamental issue is neither exposing scientology’ abuses nor making money. It is that a specific narrative is being forwarded for some unstated reason, and it is a fiction. And I think the “critics” need to follow that same advice. Cease the firefighting.

          • Hi guys thanks for reply. Some of my posts are allowed and some not. Since no real dialog can take place and my views are culled, I will not respond anymore.
            But thanks Marty for allowing some of my views.

            Have a great day.

            • There have been many great discussions here in the past. I often go back and read various topics and the comments. I hope Marty keeps his blog posted and doesn’t pull it down as Alanzo did with his blog.

              I speculate that Alanzo just got tired of thinking about scn every day as would be necessary while running a scn oriented blog so he just “disconnected.” I hope he’s off travelling somewhere as he did in his younger years, far away from thoughts and involvement in the subject. All things must pass.

    • You condemn hate, but you have to be solidly parked in it to be so sadistic with the gaslighting.

      • Gaslighting only works on people with low self worth and power. Thinking that I can gaslight Marty is not a very flattering take on Marty’s personal strength Oracle.

        I grant Marty more personal power than that Oracle. I’m surprised you can even think my words have that much power over him. Maybe I should be flattered?

        • And now you gaslight me. This still doesn’t mean I have said anything untrue.

        • This is what I mean by gaslighting. First of all, your statement “Gaslighting only works on people with low self-worth and power”, dehumanizes your victims. Justifies the crime.

          I never said you were successful at gaslighting Marty, I just said you made the attempt. I never implied Marty had low self-worth and power. YOU ARE.

          I never said your words had any power over him, yet, you write “I’m surprised you can even think my words have that much power over him.”

          I never said or implied you have ANY power over him. But here you are, saying I said that or thought that.

          You’ve really got it going on with the mind games and alter is. This is gaslighting. What you are doing is not a reflection on anyone but you.

  7. Wow, until now I didn’t even notice the disparities between Haggis’ stories between the book and doc; but I remember them once you stated them. The one in the book really stood out, “Take me there”.

    No one involved with the doc did any research? Checked for continuity? Wright is a Pulitzer prize winning author and Gibney has won an Oscar and neither realized, ‘oops, these stories are totally different’?? If Haggis’ story in the doc had been condensed, or even expanded, that’d be different. Totally different? Why? Which one is true?

    Good point about Spanky. Perhaps they filmed her saying the reasons why she joined and just didn’t include that; but why not? It would have given people a fuller picture of her. Instead they just dramatized her alleged escape.

    The agenda of the doc was to portray Scientology badly, an evil entity that shouldn’t be a tax exempt religion. Including Sara Goldsmith, who wasn’t in the book, who’s daughter had just recently disconnected from her. Disconnection stories DO pull at your heartstrings. Anyone with any empathy would feel for those people. But, you have to see beyond your heartstrings. Actually ignore the sad song your heartstrings are playing and look at it analytically. When you do that, you’ll see, IMO, that the majority of people who disconnect do it of their free will. They have the right to do it. No matter how much pain it causes the other person, and no doubt it causes the person who disconnects pain too.

    I’m not saying disconnection is right or okay; but most people who do it, do it of their own free will (I said most). And yes, other religions shun too. People are excommunicated, shunned by church members and even family members. If someone participates in a faith that does this, it’s a risk you assume when you become a member and you don’t comply with the church’s rules.

    Do people avoid other people in every day life? I bet most people do and don’t even realize it. Is there a certain cashier you avoid at a store because they bag groceries horribly? A co-worker who’ll always stop you if you walk by to discuss their hemorrhoids or foot fungus? Probably a couple bad examples, but hopefully enough to get my point across—isn’t that a form of shunning? You avoid certain people. You’ve ‘disconnected’ from associating with them. Not the same as family, no of course not; but I wanted to point out, people practice shunning in their life and don’t realize it. Should you be judged for that? No, of course not.

    If someone disconnects from their family of their own free will, why judge them? Why try to force people onto them that they don’t want in their life at the moment? The ASC argument is that the disconnectees have the right to see their child/ren, parents, family, etc. But don’t the disconnecters have any rights? It appears to the ASC they do not, because they’re in the Church of Scientology and if you’re in that, then no, you have rights. Even though the ASC claims they’re fighting for church member’s rights.

    The ASC practices pretzel logic. It’s a very very salty pretzel too.

    • Miss Tia, dear, your comment betrays your partisanship. The church’s policy and practice of (forced) disconnection is indefensible no matter how skilled and corrupt a propagandist Alex Gibney might be. Which is why LRH cancelled it in 1968’s Reform Code of Scientology. And it wasn’t even a forced disconnection then, it was a lighter “handle or disconnect” policy that got abused too often that rankled the general public enough for LRH to cancel it when he discovered by survey the bad public reaction.

      Whether or not LRH authorized its re-institution (in a stricter form) in 1983 is beside the point. He recognized that a policy should never outlive the situation it was designed to handle. Otherwise, a policy (or law or regulation) becomes an arbitrary. Moreover, he had the good sense to maintain ARC with the public through surveys. As stated in PR Series 2, an organization must remain “real” to the public.

      One only has to open his or her eyes to see that the church’s current policy is both oppressive and despised.

      As you admit, stories such as Sara’s DO pull at your heartstrings. (BTW, Sara Goldberg, not Goldsmith.) You should review Sara’s story. Here it is: http://www.tampabay.com/news/scientology/scientology-clergy-force-a-mother-to-choose-son-or-daughter/2170325

      You talk about choices made by the church member. Members do sometimes voluntarily, without any policy motivation, disconnect based on the circumstances known to them. It remains, however, that there are consequences if they do not disconnect from a person who has been declared a Suppressive Person (an SP). From a policy, therefore, disconnection is mandatory. There is no true choice in the matter, so we can dispense with the voluntary argument.

      Above and beyond the policy itself, and what makes the church’s policy of disconnection orders of magnitude worse than any other church’s policy of shunning, loss of fellowship, etc. are the attendant practices that render the declarations underpinning the disconnection order arbitrary, unjust and/or false. There are many reported examples where the loved ones were given false reasons for the declarations and were not allowed to talk to the declared person to get his or her side of the story. A meaningful choice was not even possible. Nor was the declared person even given recourse to challenge the declaration in some cases. No other mainstream church cuts communication and affinity lines so severely. None!

      In my case, for example, which I detail in my book, Arrows in the Dark (http://www.arrowsinthedark.com/), I was verbally declared and not given a written declare order. I reported to the church’s International Justice Chief (IJC) in writing that it was a false declare and requested a Comm Ev but never received a response. I subsequently heard a pack of lies from people who had been given confidential briefings of the basis for my declare.

      Neither I nor My wife, who was not herself declared to our knowledge, heard from our daughter. Nor had our son, the last we know. Her choice to disconnect from all of us at the same time cannot be called voluntary if she was not even presented with true information or spoke to us about it. Who knows what she was even told. No recognized church does this. None!

      There are many examples like mine and Sara’s which, not only bring tears, but shock the conscience of all fair-minded people.

      While I am glad to see Marty expose the false narrative and purposes of the ASC, let’s not go black-and-white on this and overlook the real situation. No informed person not on the church’s payroll can defend the its policy and practice of disconnection in good faith.

      (BTW, Leah and Mike know about my story and I was not contacted to be on their show. I even reached out to Leah through various channels and was told she didn’t want to talk to anyone who was pro-tech. Marty is spot-on in his criticism of her motives and intentions. Bravo. Veritas. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veritas))

      The church will never be accepted into the mainstream of religions until this oppressive policy (and practices associated with it) is/are are abolished or, at a minimum, substantially reformed.

      The church has, in fact, created the environment in which the propaganda tactics of Wright, Gibney and Ortega, and their followers, have been effective.

      And the church, by its own actions, can eliminate the toxic environment it created and thereby calm down those who are restimulated (i.e., pissed off) and render the propagandists ineffective. Marty’s effort can only go so far without internal reform of the church.

      • I read PTS and Disconnection as a clarification of Church policy on the subject. Just as you can’t force someone to disconnect. You also can’t force someone to remain associated to someone.

        As usual with many things in the Church these days. It has turned that policy on its head and perverted its intent.

        The same with security checking. At one time they were abolished and now it’s basically all they do over there. Other than objectives.

        Their subversion of tech and policy is almost legendary. Ask anyone who is actually trained in the subject.

        That said. People like the “troika”, Wright and Gibney don’t help as all they do is pour gasoline on the fire.

        • “You also can’t force someone to remain associated to someone.”

          This is the oppressive nature of the Sea Organization. People are forced to remain associated with others they would never share a table with the outside of that place.

          Then people leave that circle, come out here and what happens? They group up into another cult and enforce themselves on others (Who prefer to choose their own company and path) through web sites, stalking, tipsters, fair gaming, and spying. It’s as though if they didn’t have bad company, they would have no company at all. And at the end of the day, it’s mostly true. They have grown accustomed to having company through enforcement. And they force themselves on others in any way they can. All the time protesting madly about disconnection. Because they are only accustomed to enforced company. Where people have been forced to tolerate them through a group endeavor. Honestly, it is like having lice.

    • In my opinion this disconnection thing is a complex issue that the ASC likes to play on along with their other fave “Fair Game”.

      In real life we see disconnection played out all the time only it’s not called such. For instance some heir being disinherited or Billy Joel’s famous song “It’s My Life” or in many cases of divorce.

      Yet they rag on Scientology so as they can play on the emotional heart strings of their audience.

      I’ve seen in many cases that the parents turned their child over to the tender mercies of the Sea Org or staff and then left the Church.

      Many of those cases as the case of Merrell were unjust but there are other cases where the parents attempted a snatch and grab via a deprogrammer or tried to sue the Church or riled up the “authorities” and then stupidly wonder why their kid isn’t talking to them.

      Gee whiz.

      Of course the ASC is counting on the lack of intelligence and discernment and the unthinking emotionalism of their audience and lumps all these cases of disconnection together without giving the actual circumstances behind of each case on a case by case basis as usual.

      Hey but that’s what they call “reality television” which hasn’t changed all that much from the days of Jerry Springer.

  8. Interesting video series. People talk about it.
    One question: What is your current relationship with Jason Beghe?

  9. Wright is such a phony and a fraud. He read Russell Miller’s book Bare Faced Messiah which he pretty much plagiarized for the “biographical” details on Hubbard and assumes Miller’s distorted view encouraged by the USG’s black propaganda campaign exposed by Garrison and the GO’s FOIA efforts and claims he’s an “expert” on subject.

    Also much of his information on Scientology and the People’s Temple has been filtered through such Mk Ultra luminaries as Marg Singer, Jolly West and Martin Orne all who were on the Board of the Directors of the notorious American Family Foundation who encouraged thugs like Ted Patrick to kidnap young adults and subject them to the psychological torture known as “deprogramming”.

    Then of course there is Paul Haggis who claims he was duped for over thirty years acting like some brainless straw man until Wright like the man behind the green curtain in the Wizard of Oz gave him his certificate. Ignoring the fact that while in Scientology he became an Academy Award winning director.

    Fact is I respect William S Burroughs who even though he left the Church still said he benefited from his experience in Scientology more than Haggis who as far as I’m concerned is a total sell out trying to curry favor now by claiming he was nothing but a mind controlled automaton with no will or ability to perceive prior to leaving Scientology.

    I could go on about Gibney’s propagandizing on behalf of the deep state under the facade of being a documentarian but I’ll end this rant.

  10. sweetknees125

    Keep the video’s coming.

  11. If Marty feels like posting this it’s just for fun and a laugh and not directed at anyone or anything at any particular time.

  12. Sometimes just cutting loose and not trying to make sense makes sense.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google+ photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s