Hello , I am an ex Scientologist , this blog is primarily about that but I may address other topics as the mood hits me to . I was in Scientology for 25 years and spent about 10,000 hours using the indoctrination and thought reform method "study tech " . I also spent time on staff and met hundreds of Scientologists and did hundreds of the cult practices . Many were the "ethics cycles and OW writeups " that really are an attempt to suppress or remove a person's identity and replace it with a mental pseudo clone of Ron Hubbard . To make a fanatical slave for the cult .

I looked outside the cult for answers in about January 2014 and left the cult in about March of 2014 . While in about 99% of members have no idea of the truth .

We are told we are in a mental therapy or spiritual enhancement or religion or science for helping people unlock potential . Or any of several other fronts that all pretend kind and humanitarian goals .

The truth is Scientology is a terrorist mind control cult and this blog is my attempt to understand and expose that . And try to state as clearly as possible the tools that I have found helpful in dealing with this .

Monday, July 24, 2017

As The Rathbun Turns

Now that Marty Rathbun has reportedly been sought for a deposition on his finances and relationships regarding Scientology I think it's a good time to gather all my posts on Marty Rathbun in one place.

Tony Ortega reported on Marty Rathbun's latest legal escapades in his blog post


Here's a handy list of links to blog posts from Tony Ortega at the Underground Bunker on Marty Rathbun

He may not be able to lie and con his way out of his current legal troubles. We shall see.

Here are some of my own posts on Marty Rathbun from Mockingbird's Nest.
Marty Rathbun Scientology Beliefs
Chris Shelton and Marty Rathbun - Critical Thinkers ?
Marty Rathbun -Later Day Ron Hubbard ?
Jon Atack and Marty Rathbun - the Critical Difference
Marty Rathbun's Mission - Scientology's Useful Idiot

Monday, July 17, 2017

Getting Into And Out Of Scientology part 1

There's a long list of things that get someone into a cult mindset and often what needs to be addressed is dependent to a large degree on two classes of things at least. You have what has persuaded them and how it persuaded them as one and the other is their individual psychology.

For me as an easy example I made certain assumptions and decisions going into the cult that made me a true believer and a series of actions and decisions that countered or neutralized much of that in coming out. I also discovered the Scientology indoctrination methods weren't at all what I thought they were and could examine the  general categories of thought reform used and the specific techniques on Scientology that fit those categories.

Scientology persuaded me of its effectiveness with the observable phenomena of using study technology to create a series of physiological and mental and emotional reactions which it described and the methods to change or reduce those reactions which it also described, thus framing them as proof the barriers to study existed and the procedures presented alleviated the barriers.

I spent hundreds and hundreds of hours on course so that was the bulk of my conversion process.

The extensive loaded language in Scientology acted as a way to continually give new and more strength to the persuasion of the indoctrination. By thinking in terms that I thought defined reality accurately I in effect validated those terms and strengthened anew the neural networks that held those terms and because Hubbard used Orwellian reversals for Double Think it also involved denial of the truth about the terms and reality of Scientology each time they were thought of thus acting to strengthen habitual unconscious rejection of the truth and acceptance of the lie.

Additionally Hubbard interwove definitions of his terms to overlap endlessly creating the effect that thinking of the tone scale triggers thinking the tone levels are real and that auditing is genuine and present time and the reactive mind and thousands of other things because they all are defined by one another in endless loops.

I at one point got a job requiring rapid communication. I realized thinking in Scientology terms slowed down my communication as I translated everything into Scientology terms before accepting it or if my thoughts into English before saying it. I thought it would not matter if I thought and spoke in English.

By thinking in English and leaving Scientology out of it the persuasion weakened. Over months and years independent and critical thinking began to creep back into existence.

I had in going into Scientology decided that Hubbard could not be influencing people via his words. I twenty five years later saw a show about two people trapped in the mind of a person. Obviously an impossible situation, but it made me realize if a person has enough opportunity for repetition they could possibly by persistence and possibly variation eventually persuade someone. That countered a lowering of my guard from years before.

I also in examining the behavior of others saw the need for individuals to see themselves as responsible for the decisions and actions they make no matter what leaders or beliefs they have as the leader could be wrong or beliefs mistaken. That decision that authority isn't ever to be treated as the ultimate lone decider shook me in a way I didn't understand.

I got a series of nagging doubts that something wasn't right in mu life but I couldn't figure out how. I didn't understand that I was gradually throwing off my habits and thoughts that held the Scientology persuasion in force, so it diminished.

I thought I should examine everything in my life carefully and see if I was doing something wrong or missing something. I knew I had a good job, was married to the woman I wanted to be married to and loved, loved my kids and everything was good with them and I was in good health with conditions generally improving.

But something didn't feel right. I set out to check everything in my life and automatically thought of Scientology and at first thought that could only make things better and then stopped myself. I realized I was not really carefully examining it at all and out of habit assumed it was fine.

I got extremely anxious and didn't like the feeling. I decided to examine it. In the past I had always looked for all the answers regarding Scientology in Scientology. I knew that would not give me anything different. I thought of reading Hubbard's books again but knew that would take me to where I had already been.

I stopped myself and thought of looking outside Scientology and that if it was genuine I could always go back. It wasn't going anywhere.

I looked at several sites and couldn't understand the jokes or even language at ESMB. I ended up reading the posse of lunatics story at Freedom magazine. I realized something had to be terribly wrong in the Sea Org. That led to seeing the Sea Org as a fraud.

I didn't understand how I had the mental, physical and emotional reactions in Scientology. I ended up at the Underground Bunker reading the Scientology Mythbusting series of articles and Never Believe A Hypnotist.

I also read a little about psychology influence and  cognitive dissonance theory and hypnosis.

I figured out that Hubbard's study technology is a fraud and the phenomena described do occur but the barriers don't exist and the phenomena have been reported to be due to study factors when they really correspond to trance phenomena and cognitive dissonance manifestations.

Hubbard used ideas he long knew from hypnosis like the induction methods of contradiction (aka confusion aka paradox), mimicry, repetition-with-variation, vivid imagery, guided imagery, attention fixation and division and age regression. Anything to get the transference aka altitude aka prestige or authority he desired.

I absolutely needed to understand the dope off he described was a hypnotic phenomena as was the feeling of overwhelm and the blank feeling, the washed out feeling, the not there feeling and much more. I had to understand the confusion, reelingness and exasperation he described as well as nervous hysteria are results of cognitive dissonance and the blank is actually the moment of indecision cognitive dissonance inspires- into which Hubbard inserts an idea as a command to be grasped in desperation to resolve the confusion and make a decision.

That's a key element in certain forms of persuasion and hypnosis. The hypnotist decides for the person. A decision, any decision that gets attention off the confusion removes the unpleasant emotions like anxiety aka nervous hysteria that the confusion created.

In Scientology indoctrination lots of confusion occurs as Hubbard contradicts himself and reality and accepted facts very often. So a Scientologist gets confused and believes he has an MU and tries to accept Hubbard's direction to look elsewhere for a word to clear then accepts Hubbard's ideas that the doctrine is correct and the definitions he provides are true.

So by learning that Hubbard framed the indoctrination as study technology when in fact it is cognitive restructuring I undid the mystical manipulation he used. Lifton described mystical manipulation as using predictable and explainable normal phenomena that are falsely presented as miraculous or magical and using the definitions of them to reframe reality and the existence of them and manipulation of them as proof the definitions are genuine. So a cult member thinks that the barriers to study for example exist when they actually don't.

Hubbard's loaded language and mystical manipulation each feed each other. His persuasion triggered what is called trance logic. That's a highly suggestible state in which contradictions are ignored by the conscious mind and denied. It's an age regressed state that is open to magical thinking. It's similar to being a young child and knowing your parents are to be obeyed without question because if you don't understand why they want something you know they are capable of making the best decisions and so obey their authority automatically.

I realized the study technology had created a specific effect: while trying to memorize twenty plus departments in order with their corresponding awareness characteristics on the staff status II course I had stopped doing something. Previously I had some reservations about Scientology.

I had joined staff naively thinking I would find out if Scientology really was what it claimed and if not I would tell the world. I had kept three categories of information. I had my beliefs from before Scientology, I had the thousands of English word definitions I had to clear in Scientology study technology and be prepared to instantly rattle off without hesitation or comm lag to pass a spot check and the hundreds of Scientology terms I had to likewise clear and hundreds of Scientology phrases and mottos as well. It was a lot of work to keep all three categories separate and constantly growing.

It was too much work. So I stopped and let the three groups all merge. I didn't worry about what ideas were mine or English or Hubbard's. I just accepted everything he said and my anxiety and confusion disappeared as I used trance logic and took it all in on his authority.

I had no conscious awareness of contradiction but it was of course present as subconscious content denied by me.

I had to understand all these things and more to throw off the influence of Scientology.

Sunday, July 16, 2017

Marty Rathbun's Mission - Scientology's Useful Idiot

Marty Rathbun's betrayal of the people that took him in as one of their own despite his decades of crimes, often against them both as a class and personally, was of course disappointing.

Some truly trusted him and set aside a long and public history of harm and abuse he carried out as a top executive in Scientology. He was given the benefit of every doubt, the second chance he needed by many people without a moment's hesitation.

Hundreds of ex Scientologists had adopted a rule that has even been written and encouraged at ESMB - don't put down ANYONE on a deeply personal basis except for Ron Hubbard and David Miscavige.

Just about any insult or criticism of those two is acceptable, but everyone else is off limits.

Some people were extremely bitter about Marty Rathbun and doubtful but the majority agreed and so in general criticism of Marty Rathbun's conduct was discouraged.

He turned and - as Tony Ortega pointed out in great detail ahead of virtually everyone else - Marty Rathbun defended David Miscavige and attacked Ron Miscavige Sr, David's father.

That coupled with the dropping of the lawsuit by Marty Rathbun's wife against Scientology set speculation wild.

I now believe that Marty Rathbun's mission for Miscavige is at least in part one thing: he is meant to attract as much attention as possible to himself.

David Miscavige somehow has Marty Rathbun acting for his benefit now. How or why I don't precisely know. I have heard rumors like everyone else.

It could be for money or to get the Scientology cult to promise to leave his family alone or Marty Rathbun's desire for attention. Or refusal to accept playing a bit part temporarily in the history of Scientology.

Regardless of his reasons his effect is similar to that of Trump on major media news in the U.S. Trump now gets ninety percent of all that media. All day every day is Trump, Trump, Trump.

Whether Trump is good or bad, smart or stupid every story with few exceptions is about Trump and usually his personality and not new information on his psychology or past or present. Lots of the same thing over and over.

I think an obvious problem whether you love or hate or don't care about Trump is that the news should have a lot of other important stories. Things are certainly happening.

Wars are being fought. I routinely talk to American adults that don't even know the US is at war or bombing seven countries routinely. Or that we dropped over twenty six thousand bombs on those countries last year.

I think the people should know that, and much more. For David Miscavige the example of a polarizing lightning rod that takes all attention off everything else must be a dream come true.
By having Marty Rathbun deliver his dozens of videos over many, many segments and promise to reveal mysteries in later installments I am sure David Miscavige thought this would attract all our attention in the Scientology watching and critical and under the radar communities.

Together there are thousands of us who routinely read the Underground Bunker, watch videos by Chris Shelton and Jeffrey Augustine and read Mike Rinder's blog and read books on Scientology and watch Leah Remini's show.

It's a dedicated and diverse group. David Miscavige wants us neutralized. He doesn't want us comparing and combining notes and stories on the abuses of Scientology, the crimes of Scientology, the lies by Scientology and especially the organization as it operates.

Scientology is compartmentalized. Pieces don't know or understand what other portions know or do. That's ultimately a reflection of the fractured or split mind of its founder Hubbard himself.

It's a practical function too. He wanted a criminal enterprise with the fraud, financial irregularities and criminal activities like espionage and fair game stalking, harassment and terror campaigns hidden from almost everyone in Scientology and certainly from the outside world.

Hubbard's greed led him to try and horde money and power in a way that would be disapproved of by almost everyone and certainly legal authorities in most countries. He set up Scientology to hide it and used a Byzantine labyrinth of Scientology corporate structure to achieve that.

I firmly believe David Miscavige absolutely doesn't want that investigated or discussed or information put out broadly on it.

The US tax exemption is one of the most vulnerable points of Scientology. If it could be threatened by any means that could undo the entire organization.

It relies on the extremely powerful protection it provides from prosecution and numerous lawsuits and the free pass it gives for hundreds of human rights abuses.

I think it's appropriate for Marty Rathbun's statements to be refuted and people that feel betrayed or offended to speak out. Just understand David Miscavige counts that as a win now. If he can stop justice and distract and redirect the efforts of his critics he will rest easy. He will see that as a win.

I don't want Scientology to continue committing crimes, to continue to hurt its critics and own members and to continue to  operate with impunity.

I don't have any authority to tell people who or what to talk about. I don't deserve or even know enough to warrant it. I just want people to consider that if Marty Rathbun is meant to be a distraction or useful idiot for David Miscavige that we don't let him use us too.

We can turn the conversation back to the crimes and secrets of Scientology. And perhaps defeat the idiot and his master some day. Or at least not be fooled into stopping.

Thursday, July 6, 2017

Jon Atack and Marty Rathbun - The Critical Difference

I just finished the Jeffrey Augustine interview of Jon Atack.
Jon Atack has an incredible memory and the ability to coordinate vast amounts of information in a way in which he can pick out connections of which details are relevant and to be precise and thorough.
I want to emphasize something I realized regarding Jon Atack's work and contrast it against his opposite in many respects - Marty Rathbun.
I criticized Marty Rathbun's writing as lacking logical cohesiveness and frankly truthful accuracy a couple years ago and his followers for not being able to be unbiased in their gleeful acceptance of his ideas. Several were more independent and rational in regards to statements on Scientology from others, but threw away objectivity and standards of judgment for Marty Rathbun for some reason.
In sharp contrast we have Jon Atack. I think he is the top expert on the subject I have encountered from both a historical perspective and an understanding of how the technology functions perspective also.
Jon Atack has been incredibly accurate regarding details and to my knowledge not embellished at all.
I realized in looking at the video of Jon Atack's interview in contrast to the unending series by Marty Rathbun that the difference is that Jon Atack uses and encourages critical thinking. I don't mean a vague idea of being cautious.
Sometimes I discuss critical thinking with Scientologists and a few ex Scientologists that defensively proclaim themselves critical thinkers and display no understanding what it is or in their behavior that they practice it.
I am going to put up a small quote to show how it applies and the difference between Marty Rathbun and Jon Atack's work is obvious.
Universal Intellectual Standards
The intellectual standards that are to these elements are used to determine the quality of reasoning. Good critical thinking requires having a command of these standards. According to Paul and Elder (1997 ,2006), the ultimate goal is for the standards of reasoning to become infused in all thinking so as to become the guide to better and better reasoning. The intellectual standards include:
Could you elaborate?
Could you illustrate what you mean?
Could you give me an example?
How could we check on that?
How could we find out if that is true?
How could we verify or test that?
Could you be more specific?
Could you give me more details?
Could you be more exact?
How does that relate to the problem?
How does that bear on the question?
How does that help us with the issue?
What factors make this difficult?
What are some of the complexities of this question?
What are some of the difficulties we need to deal with?
Do we need to look at this from another perspective?
Do we need to consider another point of view?
Do we need to look at this in other ways?
Does all of this make sense together?
Does your first paragraph fit in with your last one?
Does what you say follow from the evidence?
Is this the most important problem to consider?
Is this the central idea to focus on?
Which of these facts are most important?
Is my thinking justifiable in context?
Am I taking into account the thinking of others?
Is my purpose fair given the situation?
Am I using my concepts in keeping with educated usage, or am I distorting them to get what I want? From
You can see Jon Atack's work has all these standards. Marty Rathbun's work , like Hubbard's before him, is sadly lacking in every one.
I feel many ex Scientologists develop or recover excellent critical thinking skills as part of recovery from Scientology.
I certainly believe Chris Shelton is a superb example of this. Jefferson Hawkins, the Headleys and many others have done this as well.
No one is infallible or perfect but within human limitations is a vast spectrum of competence with Jon Atack at one end and Marty Rathbun way down at the other.
The criticism of Marty Rathbun's latest videos is often that he lacks the intellectual standards of a good critical thinker. And in contrast Jon Atack epitomizes them.
For people trying to understand or especially recover from Scientology the difference is between being helped by Jon or being buried under more bullshit by Marty. And to me it's all the difference in the world.

Monday, July 3, 2017

Scientology a Cult by Design

One of the hardest things to get people to understand is what makes a cult a cult isn't esoteric beliefs about disembodied seventy five million year old ghosts or a fake navy or even the E Meter. What makes a cult is a group that tries to control all or nearly all the decision making of its members. By having such absolute control the cult denies the individuality, value, boundaries, independence and judgment of its members.
Doing this requires violating human rights and setting up an abuser/master and victim/slave relationship between the cult leader and the member. You have to be willing to deny the humanity of another and disregard their value and human rights to have a cult. You have to be willing to falsely pretend infallible authority and unquestionable superior perfection to lead others to get a cult. It requires idealization of a leader and absolute acceptance of the decisions and doctrine set forth.
It does not matter what the doctrine is about, it could be religious, political, business related or just about anything. I have read about political, religious and other cults. Carpet cleaning, exercise, and horse grooming cults. The control and elevated leaders and abuse make the cult. Always the abuse.
Scientology gets high marks in the control and abuse categories. The trail of people utterly ruined is Hubbard's legacy.

Scientology's Secrets - 1 The Self Is Not The Other

 A small percentage of people, some estimates are between one and perhaps four to eight percent depending on the source, are considered to have no empathy and no real love for anyone besides themselves at all.

It's hard to get normal people to understand some people don't care for their parents, spouses, friends or children in any way resembling love or compassion. That's alien to their thinking and their deepest feelings.

If Scientology has taught me anything it is this: everyone is not identical in disposition. Some people are extremely different. When I first encountered Scientology I thought of it in terms of how I would have created it. I thought if I was running a fraud I would have made a good fortune and fled to a nice country that would let me stay there and enjoyed a nice retirement. Or that if I made Scientology and believed sincerely in the technology and claims of results I would have stuck with Scientology and worked on it for life.

I didn't realize other options were available. I didn't realize other kinds of personality existed. I didn't realize the methods to persuade and shape a group that has faith in Scientology persist despite a lack of results due to psychological and social factors.

You can get people in certain environments and circumstances to believe things that aren't true. You can get only one in a few thousand potential recruits to join and if your group is isolated and controls the information the members receive make it look larger and more successful than it really is.

I didn't realize that some people that fool people don't just want money, but they also want to control others as fully as possible for as long as possible and feel powerful from fooling many people. The more people they fool the more they want. It's a ravening hunger for some.

Some people are not sane and also are dishonest within the information they do hold. In other words some are both conmen and mad. I didn't know some people have denial, dissociation and projection as permanent aspects of their identities. I didn't know some people hold such fully developed separate aspects of their fragmented or split minds they make actual identities of complex deception that seem genuine to even them but mask deep hidden identities of opposite character.

I didn't understand that certain people hold contradictory qualities in conflicting selves within one mind. I didn't understand that the required efforts and knowledge to hide fraud, crimes, pathological lying, plagiarism and false research and results could be carried out for decades by a mind that via continuous double think also simultaneously denies these things and presents itself as infallible, successful, honest and moral and fully believes it.

The split mind of the guru was something I wasn't prepared for. It explains the compulsion of Hubbard to keep Scientology going and keep plagiarizing long after any desire to become wealthy enough to retire was achieved. He was addicted to fooling himself and pretending to be a god and messiah and the more people he defrauded and enslaved, the longer he escaped justice and the longer he felt victorious against law enforcement agencies and even governments the more he felt proven better than others, despite a deep, deep feeling of worthlessness and inadequacy. The emptiness inside him could never be filled.

Scientology taught me that people can be fooled because we aren't prepared for certain actions and attitudes we ourselves don't hold. Psychologists sometimes call it reverse projection - a normal person thinking everyone is of similar character and thinking everyone has a conscience, everyone has humility and shame, everyone has consistent character and if they lie knowingly to others they don't deny it to themselves, everyone has self reflection and admits errors and limitations within themselves, everyone has love, compassion and standards of basic human decency. Believing these things in relationships with narcissists and other predators is a fatal error.
The fundamental expression of this error is with Hubbard himself and his cult. He wasn't a normal person and through his cult his predatory instincts are expressed and his contradiction filled mind. Scientology claims to be ethical but is in fact criminal and abusive.

He got individual cult members to mirror his confidence without results, ruthlessness without self reflection and his fanaticism for him without benefit to others. By getting people to one by one embrace blind devotion to him Hubbard built a bandwagon fallacy. It seemed like so many people wouldn't form a consensus without real results, but as they say you can fool some of the people some of the time.

Scientology taught me that when it comes to predators and their deceived followers that become zealots and fanatics the self is not the other.

Sunday, July 2, 2017

Scientology's "Acceptable Truth" on "Messiah" Ron Hubbard

A funny thing is the extreme contrast between the information available outside Scientology and the version of "acceptable truth" (aka lie) you get while IN Scientology.
I was told Heber Jentzsch was in prison in another country due to "religious discrimination" - which is what Scientology calls actual crimes when they are caught. Interesting interpretation.
Of course, even then I could say "when something bad happens to ME I get no compassion and told I had to go effect of my overts and witholds and be out ethics to go PTS to my unhandled PT OWs." So, if he is in prison, why aren't you asking about HIS ethics ?
I discovered something important about Scientology - some Scientologists are more revered than others. Similarly the standards Hubbard set for everyone else didn't apply to him EVEN in Scientology's version of events. Everyone knows he was injured in 1967 and he said it was due to his bravely overcoming the whole track implantation of seventy five million year old dead alien spirits in pioneering OT III .
I foolishly on several occasions asked if he was PTS to be injured and was treated like the lowest scum in the universe for daring to consider that Hubbard could have ever been wrong or less than absolutely perfect in any way. This happened several times when dealing with Sea Org members and other Scientologists.
They really acted like Hubbard was absolutely perfect and all the rules he established for humans and ethics and needs for improvement, overts, etc, didn't apply to him and that unlike everyone else he never had overts or witholds or evil purposes to overcome or even any errors in making decisions ever.
That's why I tell people he was treated like a messiah. He was treated as superior to God by several Scientologists openly. Several expressed a personal belief that long ago either one big thetan or several together created a physical universe or predecessor to it. The big one or group eventually saw it turn into a giant mess with degraded beings and old postulates piled up and like an absentee slumlord the old thetan or thetans abandoned the sum of creation and gave up.
Then as the story goes Hubbard came along and was so pure, so good, so free from evil purposes and acts that he couldn't be degraded down like everyone else and he easily and rapidly overcame the reactive mind and whole track implants everyone else is held back by. In Scientology there is the idea that one goes the effect of overts they commit in this universe. Since Scientologists see Hubbard as overt free they saw him as much better at overcoming the overts others tried to commit against him as implants and that is supposed to be why he was capable of doing what no other being could.
He was seen as a unique savior far superior to even God or gods. That's why I sometimes tell people he was treated as a messiah. It's no exaggeration.

Thursday, June 15, 2017

Scientology's Persistent Myths 3 - Sarge's E meter Story

In Scientology history one anecdote has taken on epic proportions of influence. The story Steve "Sarge" Pfauth (who was a caretaker for Hubbard in his final days) reportedly told Lawrence Wright which was described in his book Going Clear of Hubbard allegedly asking him to design a super strong E meter to rid him of his body thetans.

Tony Ortega has an excellent short article posted on this story dated July 11 2016 on his blog The Underground Bunker.

The incident described might have occurred as reported. It's possible.

I am not certain one way or the other. So, as a first point I want to say it is just one story told by one man.

That can be given too much weight in evaluating the meaning of this information. It is not to my satisfaction a well confirmed account.

Second, it is often used to fill in the blanks to complete or prove ideas on Hubbard's mental health and certain ideas on Hubbard's history.

Some people have the idea that Hubbard was more or less relatively sane when he started Dianetics in the late 40s and eventually went completely insane by the 80s or perhaps even earlier over a long slow decline.

That might be true or not. I don't know for sure either way. But it is in my opinion giving far too much value to this one anecdote, unless someone has a lot of other relevant information to support this idea and I have not seen that presented myself.

There are alternative theories on his sanity or deterioration. Some include insanity throughout his adult life, various illnesses like schizophrenia, narcissism, malignant narcissism, paranoia and a variety of others.

I personally like the malignant narcissism idea and the traumatic narcissist model Daniel Shaw created with aspects of Robert Jay Lifton's guru model.

But I just wanted to emphasize that the use of a single anecdote from a single source to make such an important evaluation is problematic in my opinion.

I think a very thorough examination of cult leaders in general and the types of personalities they may have is in order and no quick simple idea will be sufficient for that.

I would recommend watching the available YouTube videos on cults by Margaret Singer and Robert Jay Lifton and Daniel Shaw. Also reading the eight criteria for thought reform by Robert Jay Lifton (from his book Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism, the eight criteria for thought reform are available free online), True Believer by Eric Hoffer, Traumatic Narcissism by Daniel Shaw, Cults In Our Midst by Margaret Singer and all the Scientology Mythbusting articles at the Underground Bunker by Jon Atack as well as his book Let's Sell These People A Piece Of Blue Sky.

For a more comprehensive examination of cults I would give my highest recommendation to Rick Alan Ross's masterpiece of cult curriculum Cults Inside Out. Also, Take Back Your Life by Janja Lalich and Recovery From Cults and Steve Hassan's Freedom of Mind.

I have to emphasize that in my opinion in looking at cult leaders and their relationships with cult members one is dealing with abnormal psychology, the psychology of very unusual people with extremely unusual and unhealthy relationships with others. Thinking they think, believe, feel and behave as you and I do is in my opinion a fatal error. They don't and as a result their relationships aren't like ours.

To look at the psychology a lot of work can be done and can include the essential book A Theory Of Cognitive Dissonance by Leon Festinger, Age of Propaganda and The Sociopath Next Door by Martha Stout. Certainly a serious look at narcissism and malignant narcissism should be included too.

Scientology's Persistent Myths 2 - Scientology Can't Be Regulated

One thing that is really odd is the fact that a lot of Scientology critics and journalists say "I know everything in Scientology is fake and a fraud, and that it has harmed and deluded a lot of people, but it since it can't possibly be regulated, because people can believe whatever they want and will act on those beliefs. So if David Miscavige is stopped from disconnecting families, I don't care if people get auditing."

That's ridiculous to me in a few ways. It combines several false ideas. Just because people believe in something doesn't mean a behavior has to be legally allowed. There are millions of people that believe slavery is a good idea. In many countries their ideas are illegal as practices. Unfortunately there are probably millions of people that believe sex between adults and children is acceptable or desirable. Just because they believe and desire that doesn't make it legal. I am glad that practice is illegal in many situations and countries, and wish it was illegal in more situations and countries than it already is.

There are other practices like treating women and members of different races or religions as inferior beings that are unfortunately legal in some places but not everywhere that anyone desires.

There are several other beliefs that are regulated in practice and sometimes even outright denied under the law. It happens, people outlaw some behaviors.

With Scientology it would be difficult to enforce but it could be and importantly if say auditing and Scientology indoctrination were outlawed then actions taken with Scientology would be crimes and not able to hide behind the first amendment or legal protection reserved for legitimate business.

That would make a huge difference. Scientology could not require any contracts that support a criminal activity to be honored as such contracts are themselves illegal.

Furthermore a tremendous amount of evidence that auditing and Scientology indoctrination actually can be harmful to mental health while claiming to be a legitimate and scientifically validated therapy exists. There's tremendous evidence the alleged validation of Scientology never occurred and was all lies. That's a fraudulent claim. So, presenting this is false advertising.

Additionally, there have been numerous studies like the Anderson Report that consulted actual experts who time and again found Dianetics and Scientology indoctrination and auditing as dangerous, fraudulent and harmful.

In my opinion the presence of demonstrably false ideas like engrams, reactive mind, basic basic, locks, secondaries, overts, witholds, MUs, and hundreds of other ideas as the foundation of Dianetics and Scientology makes the use of it an activity in which a practitioner is doing things they don't understand in a framework that can't truly exist and is entirely fraudulent. This leads to beliefs that are delusional and the requirement of informed consent is to me impossible to satisfy.

How can an activity that is entirely framed by lies and represented with fraudulent claims be undertaken with informed consent ?

I don't think anyone understands all the harm such an activity can cause, but it has on occasion been significant. And is often noticeable. That's relevant and to me something journalists and Scientology critics should not ignore.

At the very least they should report the strong criticism actual psychologists and psychiatrists have given time and again. Both individual cult experts like Margaret Singer and Robert Jay Lifton and Jolly West, all of whom are experts on psychology or psychiatry, and panels and commissions of inquiry like the Anderson Commission have been extremely critical of Scientology auditing and indoctrination.

That's worth telling people as a fair warning.

Scientology's Persistent Myths 1 - Hubbard's Beliefs

In coverage of Scientology by media and online conversations on the subject many ideas have been brought forth and shared. Many ideas in Scientology doctrine have been thoroughly exposed as improbable and highly unlikely, if not impossible.

I have been very happy to see that and tried to make an admittedly small contribution to this effort. A lot of others have done much, much more work and reached millions of more people than I ever will.

But despite a tremendous amount of good and even great work in my opinion some points get lost or outright denied.

I understand people will have different opinions on some matters, but for some ideas a lot of evidence exists while for others far less than adequate evidence exists. Some of the ideas with a good amount of evidence aren't getting represented enough in my opinion while some others that lack strong or even moderate evidence are being taken as proven facts.

A simple example to start with is Hubbard's beliefs. On many matters it is easy to establish what he wrote in doctrine or said in taped lectures. But to say he believed it is another thing entirely.

Far too often his words are described as his beliefs. That's assuming he believed everything he said or whatever is being reported.

That's an indefensible leap. From his affirmations to a wide variety of his quotes on lying there is strong evidence he embraced lying and if you examine the contradictions in his doctrine and add them up it's clear he contradicted himself hundreds, probably thousands, of times that are easy to see. Together these two bodies of evidence with the accounts of Hubbard taking enormous efforts to hide his lack of results, to hide his plagiarism, to hide his abuses of Scientology cult members and many lies he told in his personal life clearly demonstrate that at any time Hubbard spoke or wrote it was entirely possible he was lying.

So, for any journalist or even mere blogger or Scientology critic in possession of this information to describe Hubbard's quotes as his beliefs is problematic. Perhaps this can be used to describe his affirmations and some personal letters or journals, if one sincerely believes Hubbard was entirely honest in those private personal communications, but that requires extraordinary confidence in that judgment.

To use that description for Hubbard's ideas in Dianetics and Scientology that are for public consumption or even for staff or just the Sea Org or even a portion of the Sea Org then honesty is extremely unlikely to be found, certainly beyond all reasonable doubt. So, I would never casually describe Hubbard's quotes in general as his beliefs.

Thursday, June 8, 2017

Scientology's Judas - Marty Rathbun

Marty Rathbun has been a person well known in the Scientology watching world for a variety of reasons over the years. His tenure in the Sea Org and actions as the number two man in Scientology, subordinate only to Scientology leader David Miscavige is well documented.

Marty Rathbun and David Miscavige both have admitted Marty Rathbun committed numerous crimes including felonies for Scientology and it's well established as fact by everyone on either side.

Marty Rathbun helped OSA to harass and try to utterly ruin people which can be proven out by numerous documentaries on Scientology.

I know several people that can confirm Marty Rathbun has attacked and fair gamed them personally. You don't have to look far in the Underground Bunker or ESMB (ex Scientologists message board) or Sps R us Facebook group.

So, Marty Rathbun has plenty of firsthand knowledge of abuse due to having carried out plenty himself. And of course playing a part in ordering it regarding others and reporting on it to Miscavige as well. He likely knows more about Scientology crimes and abuses than almost anyone else living.

So, with that in mind look at his actions. He worked in Scientology committing crimes and abuses for years.

Then he had a fall from grace and left and ended up feuding very publicly with David Miscavige. He wrote several books, posted criticism of Miscavige at a blog and was in several movies and videos.

He ended up dropping a court case against Scientology. Really it was in his wife's name to be technical.

After he dropped the court case he went through a transformation. He stopped criticism of Miscavige and Hubbard entirely as far I am aware of.

He instead criticizing Ron Miscavige and tried to discredit him as an author. He said unkind remarks about several other Scientology critics.

He made an odd blog post that is covertly praising David Miscavige and attempting to discredit criticism of Miscavige.

An odd reversal certainly. Marty Rathbun has gone on to have odd and rambling blog posts since then.

He acts like there is an Anti Scientology Cult and they are obsessed with memes and narratives from meme farmers that make money. He says there is a troika leading the sheep.

I would prefer to avoid such pretentious and loaded terms that are puffed up emotional language to hide the utter lack of proof Marty Rathbun has.

Strong emotions to hide poor reason.

In plain language Marty Rathbun now in his defense of Miscavige is trying to covertly deny all his prior condemnation of Scientology crimes including those by Miscavige. He is denying the crimes he at length went on about for months or years.

He in plain English is saying three people repeat claims and get the ex Scientologist community and Scientology watchers to parrot these claims. He wants the credibility of these unnamed three people destroyed because they make money from their actions.

It's so ridiculous that without his loaded terms and cherry picking of facts it looks absurd. Let's try it without those two items.

His basic claim is "don't listen to the entire critic community because three critics make money", despite thousands of people coming forth with thousands of stories of personal experience and information they get outside the critic community either through personal experience or sources or research they do independently.

Some people just speak on their own experience in Scientology or with family members in Scientology, others get information from people and practice journalism and others read books on psychology and sociology and dig through Hubbard's doctrine itself for hours to find relevant information.

And he has made money off Scientology, independent Scientology, and criticism of Scientology himself and David Miscavige has made money off Scientology too.

So, how should anyone trust Marty Rathbun himself if he asserts that people that make money off criticism of Scientology can't be trusted ? He certainly has ? And he admitted to committing crimes and hurting people for Scientology as well.

But his biggest problem in my mind and the thing I really want to zero in on is simple and the reason he is the Judas of the survivors of Scientology is one thing that is an inescapable indefensible fact: he knows about the harm Scientology has caused through fair game, OSA dirty tricks and other crimes through both committing them and witnessing them and he now denies those crimes ever existed.

I'm going to share excerpts from an earlier blog post here:

Empathic witnessing is listening and displaying humility, empathy and compassion in communication with others. It is important in human relationships but holds particular value for ex cult members.

The experience of cult members has been described by Daniel Shaw as similar to the trauma experienced by victims of rape, incest and sexual abuse. This trauma is severe and a deep personal betrayal. It is an experience that involves the treatment of the victims as less than genuine individuals in relation to the cult leader.

The victims existence as individuals fully deserving human rights and subjective views is denied by the leader. They are reshaped or treated as objects to be used as seen fit by the leader. The leader may acquire, devalue then discard them at will as they see fit. This is the pattern of a narcissist.

Cult leaders in Daniel Shaw's hypothesis on malignant narcissists as cult leaders have very specific elements. He calls such abusers traumatic narcissists because they inflict trauma in their relational systems and use trauma to subjugate others.

The use of trauma to subjugate victims by denying the victims' subjectivity confuses the victim and creates anxiety and overwhelm which leads to denial, reversals, projection in the victims often which mirrors the conduct of the leader.

By having one's subjectivity undermined and denied the victim experiences such deep betrayal it can become a core part of their identity. They can feel simultaneously worthless and less than human as a result of traumatic subjugation and at fault for deep, deep feelings of wrongness, worthlessness, shame and an irredeemable abhorrent identity.

 They can see their own decisions to trust and love abusers as creating emotional vulnerability and within their own control. Like victims of sexual abuse, incest and rape the cult members can feel they must be responsible for their own trauma. They can feel less than human through the traumatic subjugation they experience. They can internalize the cruel and hateful malignant narcissist's denial of the authentic individuality and value of others.

The traumatic narcissist (aka malignant narcissist) has shown unimaginable cruelty and nonrecognition of authenticity of the victim as a person and the victim has felt let down by their expectations of genuine value and decency in the narcissist. The victim learns the abuser shouldn't have been trusted and the abuser certainly doesn't trust others. The abuser seems to win in the relationship as they get the upper hand and have their desires fulfilled as the victim must submit to their demands.

One of the easiest traps for a member leaving to fall into is a lack of empathic witnessing. Indifferent or uncaring witnessing is unfortunately quite common. It is traumatic in itself.

It is recreating the experience of being denied authenticity as a person. By denying the abuse that is disclosed by a cult member a witness denies the assertions that the victim deserves to be accepted as a genuine person and even if this denial is only by implications or tacit indifference it still inflicts trauma on the victim.

The victim can three times over learn to not trust. They can detest their trust and love of their abusers and hate themselves for having been vulnerable and see their abuser's lack of love and trust as superior to their attitude and then finally see the lack of empathic witnessing as showing they shouldn't expect trust or recognition as a genuine person from others.

It can become deeply ingrained and convince them trust and compassion are the essential weaknesses that lead to victimization. They can share this trait with some victims of incest, rape and sexual abuse.

For victims of these highly traumatic crimes denial of their experiences is extremely traumatic.

End quote from

After The Cult Part 1 Scientology Acceptance And Denial

Marty Rathbun in his roundabout way is trying to deny the crimes and abuses of Scientology, including his own and David Miscavige's.

That's completely unacceptable and morally repugnant. Indefensible isn't a strong enough word.

He is systematically denying the experiences of thousands of victims of Scientology all at once and he knows the crimes of Scientology quite well and id entirely indifferent to the suffering of those Scientology has committed crimes against.

He is uncaring about the families torn apart by disconnection, the people suffering on the Truth Rundown in the RPF and the people who have lost loved ones to Scientology. People lose family members to Scientology drug rehab scams and other horrible tragedies routinely. There are hundreds of victims listed online . There are thousands of people raised in Scientology with unresolved trauma and severe emotional and psychological problems. 

Marty Rathbun knows damn well about all these things. It's undeniable, not a narrative or meme or any other pretentious bullshit Marty Rathbun or David Miscavige want to call it. A clever turn of a phrase or slogan won't repair the harm including deaths Scientology causes. 

That Marty Rathbun knows this all so well, even contributed to these abuses and crimes himself for years and was forgiven and even supported by Scientology critics himself, and still has the callous inhumanity to deny the existence of the crimes against the victims of Scientology shows Marty Rathbun isn't merely a traitor to the victims of Scientology. He is a traitor to the basic decency all of humanity should have. And that is why I call him  Judas. 

Wednesday, March 1, 2017

The Ten Stages of Genocide

By Gregory H. Stanton, President, Genocide Watch

Copyright 1986 Gregory H. Stanton
The Ten Stages of Genocide
By Dr. Gregory H. Stanton[1]
© 2016 Gregory H. Stanton

Genocide is a process that develops in ten stages that are predictable but not inexorable. At each stage, preventive measures can stop it. The process is not linear. Stages may occur simultaneously. Logically, later stages must be preceded by earlier stages. But all stages continue to operate throughout the process.

➔ 1. CLASSIFICATION: All cultures have categories to distinguish people into “us and them” by ethnicity, race, religion, or nationality: German and Jew, Hutu and Tutsi. Bipolar societies that lack mixed categories, such as Rwanda and Burundi, are the most likely to have genocide.
     The main preventive measure at this early stage is to develop universalistic institutions that transcend ethnic or racial divisions, that actively promote tolerance and understanding, and that promote classifications that transcend the divisions. The Roman Catholic Church could have played this role in Rwanda, had it not been riven by the same ethnic cleavages as Rwandan society. Promotion of a common language in countries like Tanzania has also promoted transcendent national identity. This search for common ground is vital to early prevention of genocide.

➔ 2. SYMBOLIZATION: We give names or other symbols to the classifications. We name people “Jews” or “Gypsies,” or distinguish them by colors or dress; and apply the symbols to members of groups. Classification and symbolization are universally human and do not necessarily result in genocide unless they lead to dehumanization. When combined with hatred, symbols may be forced upon unwilling members of pariah groups: the yellow star for Jews under Nazi rule, the blue scarf for people from the Eastern Zone in Khmer Rouge Cambodia.
     To combat symbolization, hate symbols can be legally forbidden (swastikas in Germany) as can hate speech. Group marking like gang clothing or tribal scarring can be outlawed, as well. The problem is that legal limitations will fail if unsupported by popular cultural enforcement. Though Hutu and Tutsi were forbidden words in Burundi until the 1980’s, code words replaced them. If widely supported, however, denial of symbolization can be powerful, as it was in Bulgaria, where the government refused to supply enough yellow badges and at least eighty percent of Jews did not wear them, depriving the yellow star of its significance as a Nazi symbol for Jews.

➔ 3. DISCRIMINATION: A dominant group uses law, custom, and political power to deny the rights of other groups. The powerless group may not be accorded full civil rights, voting rights, or even citizenship. The dominant group is driven by an exclusionary ideology that would deprive less powerful groups of their rights. The ideology advocates monopolization or expansion of power by the dominant group. It legitimizes the victimization of weaker groups. Advocates of exclusionary ideologies are often charismatic, expressing resentments of their followers, attracting support from the masses. Examples include the Nuremberg Laws of 1935 in Nazi Germany, which stripped Jews of their German citizenship, and prohibited their employment by the government and by universities. Denial of citizenship to the Rohingya Muslim minority in Burma is a current example.
     Prevention against discrimination means full political empowerment and citizenship rights for all groups in a society. Discrimination on the basis of nationality, ethnicity, race or religion should be outlawed. Individuals should have the right to sue the state, corporations, and other individuals if their rights are violated.

➔ 4. DEHUMANIZATION: One group denies the humanity of the other group. Members of it are equated with animals, vermin, insects or diseases. Dehumanization overcomes the normal human revulsion against murder. At this stage, hate propaganda in print and on hate radios is used to vilify the victim group. The majority group is taught to regard the other group as less than human, and even alien to their society. They are indoctrinated to believe that “We are better off without them.” The powerless group can become so depersonalized that they are actually given numbers rather than names, as Jews were in the death camps. They are equated with filth, impurity, and immorality. Hate speech fills the propaganda of official radio, newspapers, and speeches.
   To combat dehumanization, incitement to genocide should not be confused with protected speech. Genocidal societies lack constitutional protection for countervailing speech, and should be treated differently than democracies. Local and international leaders should condemn the use of hate speech and make it culturally unacceptable. Leaders who incite genocide should be banned from international travel and have their foreign finances frozen. Hate radio stations should be jammed or shut down, and hate propaganda banned. Hate crimes and atrocities should be promptly punished.

➔ 5. ORGANIZATION: Genocide is always organized, usually by the state, often using militias to provide deniability of state responsibility. (An example is the Sudanese government’s support and arming of the Janjaweed in Darfur.) Sometimes organization is informal (Hindu mobs led by local RSS militants during Indian partition) or decentralized (jihadist terrorist groups.) Special army units or militias are often trained and armed. Arms are purchased by states and militias, often in violation of UN Arms Embargos, to facilitate acts of genocide. States organize secret police to spy on, arrest, torture, and murder people suspected of opposition to political leaders. Special training is given to murderous militias and special army killing units.
     To combat this stage, membership in genocidal militias should be outlawed. Their leaders should be denied visas for foreign travel and their foreign assets frozen. The UN should impose arms embargoes on governments and citizens of countries involved in genocidal massacres, and create commissions to investigate violations, as was done in post-genocide Rwanda, and use national legal systems to prosecute those who violate such embargos.

  1. POLARIZATION: Extremists drive the groups apart. Hate groups broadcast polarizing propaganda. Motivations for targeting a group are indoctrinated through mass media. Laws may forbid intermarriage or social interaction. Extremist terrorism targets moderates, intimidating and silencing the center. Moderates from the perpetrators’ own group are most able to stop genocide, so are the first to be arrested and killed. Leaders in targeted groups are the next to be arrested and murdered. The dominant group passes emergency laws or decrees that grants them total power over the targeted group. The laws erode fundamental civil rights and liberties. Targeted groups are disarmed to make them incapable of self-defense, and to ensure that the dominant group has total control.
     Prevention may mean security protection for moderate leaders or assistance to human rights groups. Assets of extremists may be seized, and visas for international travel denied to them. Coups d’état by extremists should be opposed by international sanctions. Vigorous objections should be raised to disarmament of opposition groups. If necessary they should be armed to defend themselves.

➔ 7. PREPARATION: Plans are made for genocidal killings. National or perpetrator group leaders plan the “Final Solution” to the Jewish, Armenian, Tutsi or other targeted group “question.” They often use euphemisms to cloak their intentions, such as referring to their goals as “ethnic cleansing,” “purification,” or “counter-terrorism.” They build armies, buy weapons and train their troops and militias. They indoctrinate the populace with fear of the victim group. Leaders often claim that “if we don’t kill them, they will kill us,” disguising genocide as self-defense. Acts of genocide are disguised as counter-insurgency if there is an ongoing armed conflict or civil war. There is a sudden increase in inflammatory rhetoric and hate propaganda with the objective of creating fear of the other group. Political processes such as peace accords that threaten the total dominance of the genocidal group or upcoming elections that may cost them their grip on total power may actually trigger genocide.
     Prevention of preparation may include arms embargos and commissions to enforce them. It should include prosecution of incitement and conspiracy to commit genocide, both crimes under Article 3 of the Genocide Convention.

➔ 8. PERSECUTION: Victims are identified and separated out because of their ethnic or religious identity. Death lists are drawn up. In state sponsored genocide, members of victim groups may be forced to wear identifying symbols. Their property is often expropriated. Sometimes they are even segregated into ghettoes, deported into concentration camps, or confined to a famine-struck region and starved. They are deliberately deprived of resources such as water or food in order to slowly destroy them. Programs are implemented to prevent procreation through forced sterilization or abortions. Children are forcibly taken from their parents.  The victim group’s basic human rights become systematically abused through extrajudicial killings, torture and forced displacement.  Genocidal massacres begin. They are acts of genocide because they intentionally destroy part of a group. The perpetrators watch for whether such massacres meet any international reaction. If not, they realize that that the international community will again be bystanders and permit another genocide.
     At this stage, a Genocide Emergency must be declared. If the political will of the great powers, regional alliances, or U.N. Security Council or the U.N. General Assembly can be mobilized, armed international intervention should be prepared, or heavy assistance provided to the victim group to prepare for its self-defense. Humanitarian assistance should be organized by the U.N. and private relief groups for the inevitable tide of refugees to come.

➔ 9. EXTERMINATION begins, and quickly becomes the mass killing legally called “genocide.” It is “extermination” to the killers because they do not believe their victims to be fully human. When it is sponsored by the state, the armed forces often work with militias to do the killing. Sometimes the genocide results in revenge killings by groups against each other, creating the downward whirlpool-like cycle of bilateral genocide (as in Burundi). Acts of genocide demonstrate how dehumanized the victims have become. Already dead bodies are dismembered; rape is used as a tool of war to genetically alter and eradicate the other group. Destruction of cultural and religious property is employed to annihilate the group’s existence from history. The era of “total war” began in World War II. Firebombing did not differentiate civilians from non-combatants. The civil wars that broke out after the end of the Cold War have also not differentiated civilians and combatants. They result in widespread war crimes. Mass rapes of women and girls have become a characteristic of all modern genocides. All men of fighting age are murdered in some genocides. In total genocides all the members of the targeted group are exterminated.
     At this stage, only rapid and overwhelming armed intervention can stop genocide. Real safe areas or refugee escape corridors should be established with heavily armed international protection. (An unsafe “safe” area is worse than none at all.) The U.N. Standing High Readiness Brigade, EU Rapid Response Force, or regional forces — should be authorized to act by the U.N. Security Council if the genocide is small. For larger interventions, a multilateral force authorized by the U.N. should intervene. If the U.N. Security Council is paralyzed, regional alliances must act anyway under Chapter VIII of the U.N. Charter or the UN General Assembly should authorize action under the Uniting for Peace Resolution GARes. 330 (1950), which has been used 13 times for such armed intervention. Since 2005, the international responsibility to protect transcends the narrow interests of individual nation states. If strong nations will not provide troops to intervene directly, they should provide the airlift, equipment, and financial means necessary for regional states to intervene.

➔ 10. DENIAL is the final stage that lasts throughout and always follows genocide. It is among the surest indicators of further genocidal massacres. The perpetrators of genocide dig up the mass graves, burn the bodies, try to cover up the evidence and intimidate the witnesses. They deny that they committed any crimes, and often blame what happened on the victims. They block investigations of the crimes, and continue to govern until driven from power by force, when they flee into exile. There they remain with impunity, like Pol Pot or Idi Amin, unless they are captured and a tribunal is established to try them.
     The best response to denial is punishment by an international tribunal or national courts. There the evidence can be heard, and the perpetrators punished. Tribunals like the Yugoslav, Rwanda or Sierra Leone Tribunals, the tribunal to try the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, or the International Criminal Court may not deter the worst genocidal killers. But with the political will to arrest and prosecute them, some may be brought to justice.  When possible, local proceedings should provide forums for hearings of the evidence against perpetrators who were not the main leaders and planners of a genocide, with opportunities for restitution and reconciliation. The Rwandan gaçaça trials are one example. Justice should be accompanied by education in schools and the media about the facts of a genocide, the suffering it caused its victims, the motivations of its perpetrators, and the need for restoration of the rights of its victims.

© 2016 Gregory H. Stanton