Fiona O’Leary Continues Her Fight to Protect Autistic Children – Despite Tony Ortega’s Attempts to Discredit Her

Bizarrely, Tony Ortega continues to try to silence and discredit this woman. I tweeted the posts Fiona and others made to the Underground Bunker after they found out Ortega had called Fiona a “vicious hate-monger” in an attempt to discredit her to his readers.

He deleted their comments to keep anyone from being able to see them in the Underground Bunker within a few minutes after they were posted, but I managed to get this screenshot of them.

Tony Ortega Trying to Discredit and Silence Fiona Oleary

Tony Ortega continues to try to discredit and to silence yet another effective critic of Scientology because she will not be controlled by him.

So the next time you hear Tony Ortega say something about:

Marty Rathbun
Monique Rathbun
Carmen Llyweln
Media Lush
MissTia
Fiona O’Leary
Angry Gay Pope
Aaron Smith-Levin
@KellyKels_Melbs

Remember his pattern which I have been documenting here.

Speak your mind.

As an Ex. As a critic. Do not let Tony Ortega influence your thoughts, behaviors, or emotions. He is a controlling, demagogic, exploitative, sneering and abusive nihilist whose every word should be examined and questioned and whose every dead-agent campaign against good people should be picked apart and blown to the wind.

Any questions on what my stand is on this and why?

, , ,

15 Responses to Fiona O’Leary Continues Her Fight to Protect Autistic Children – Despite Tony Ortega’s Attempts to Discredit Her

  1. media_lush November 16, 2017 at 6:11 pm #

    my favourite commentator of all time over at the Borg Collective [don’t you mean Bunker, ed] was Espi… now that guy was sharp as a tack and funny as hell… it was apparent to me that you were in the presence of someone pretty special as far as commentating goes… of course GOKA* had to ban him… FTR the record the official reason I was banned commentating over there was for dragging the site into the sewer… ironic, yes, I know… naturally I couldn’t defend myself as the “banhammer” [his words] prevented this. So I challenged him and all the commentators to show me specific examples of this and made a point of making my Disqus comments public… to this day my comments are there for all to see [and I swear on Xenu’s codpiece that I have never deleted any of them]…

    ridiculous thing is that a lot of them supported me privately but admitted they were too scared to make this support public… pretty fucking ridiculous if you think about it and something Ortega should be ashamed of.

    *Guardian Of Krustie’s Arse

    • marildi November 16, 2017 at 8:02 pm #

      Espi, or Espiando, posts at Mike Rinder’s blog, although he has been posting less and less over the last months, from what I recall. I have to agree that he does seem to be well read and educated, and writes well. That and the fact that he is – or claims to be – a never-in always made me wonder what he’s doing spending so much of his time and talent posting on the subject of Scientology.

      He would no doubt say, as he has many times, that his personal “issue” with Scientology is the fact that LRH wanted to eliminate all homosexuals, and he himself is gay. But this notion is another one of those interpretations of a particular reference that has been taken out of context, on a parallel with Ortega asserting that Scientology believes it is OK to be a pedophile – despite the fact that virtually no Scientologists ever had either of these considerations.

      As for his claim of being a never-in, it doesn’t match the kind of details and trivia only someone who had been around orgs or missions would know – which again makes me wonder about him.

      So from my perspective, Espiando seems to be a questionable player.

      • PeaceMaker November 17, 2017 at 2:08 am #

        marildi, this is a bit tangential, but it provides an opening to ask a question about an issue that I think is quite telling about your general claims of things being taken “out of context.”

        It seems pretty obvious that Scientology has eliminated homosexuals from its ranks, as there are no “out” gays or couples among the public, staff, or Sea Org (among the celebrities, who apparently live by different rules, the three or so whose adventures in bisexuality have been tolerated, are not “out” by any means). Or do you deny even that?

        • marildi November 17, 2017 at 11:39 am #

          “It seems pretty obvious that Scientology has eliminated homosexuals from its ranks…”

          That’s a far cry from how the word “eliminate” is interpreted, and even that isn’t based on the reference in question or any reference.

          But you’re right that this is a bit tangential. My actual point is that Ortega and his ilk twist such quotes for their own purposes – which is, as stated by Alanzo in the blog post, “controlling, demagogic, exploitative, sneering and abusive.” This extends to his/their response to anyone daring to protest such twisting and misinterpretation.

      • Richard November 17, 2017 at 6:35 am #

        Espiando might participate because Scientology is a psychedelic rabbit hole. And the White Knight said “Feed your head”

        • marildi November 17, 2017 at 11:48 am #

          That could be. The intrigue of it all…

  2. PeaceMaker November 17, 2017 at 1:16 am #

    Alonzo, I don’t follow what goes on on social media, and haven’t seen you post enough background on what O’Leary said or did, for me to determine whether or not Ortega might be justified in what he said. I could see it going either way, but I don’t see that you’ve really documented the basis for your conclusion.

    I thought Ortega’s most recent post about Pete Griffiths was rather more interesting. There were also quite a few people who spoke up to say that McGhee had acted wrongly both in how the treated the scientologist and Griffiths – enough so that I didn’t chime in on the subject myself, though I have spoken up about misbehavior by protesters and critics when others haven’t.

    • Alanzo November 17, 2017 at 7:44 am #

      You seem to assume that simply because Tony Ortega called Fiona a vicious hate monger that he must have had reason to call her that other than to simply discredit her because he could not control her.

      And yet he called her a vicious hate monger while giving absolutely no evidence that she was one. Don’t you think it would be up to Tony, and not up to me, to provide evidence for what he called her?

      And now, because Tony did not say why he called her that, it’s my fault I haven’t given the reason he called Fiona O’Leary a vicious hate monger.

      See how tribalism works?

      The reason couldn’t be what I said. Because I am not a member of your tribe.

      Even though I have been very clearly and very thoroughly documenting Tony Ortega’s pattern of silencing and discrediting good people because they refuse to be controlled by him, you can not accept it because it does not fit your tribal narrative that Tony Ortega is an unbiased investigative journalist and they don’t do that.

      Well what if your tribal narrative is wrong?

      See here’s where having been in a cult actually puts me and other Exes in a stronger position than many never ins who have never learned how easily they can become indoctrinated into a tribe and not even know it.

      I saw some of those posts where people spoke up to condemn John McGhee’s assault of individual scientologists who are not responsible for the abuse in Scientology. And I was fairly encouraged to see that. It’s good to know that you too have spoken up about others as well.

      When are you going to seek the answers from Tony, and not me, about why he called Fiona a “vicious hate monger” and banned her from the Underground Bunker?

      • PeaceMaker November 18, 2017 at 3:45 am #

        Alanzo, I didn’t make that assumption; and no, I don’t have that “narrative.” Also, if I belong to any “tribe,” it’s not one you have identified.

        So I thought at the time, of asking Ortega to clarify or explain what he was talking about, but in my experience that rarely gets a response – and if it does, it’s just a gruff comeback. (Nonetheless, I continue to ask questions at times, on principle, and in hopes that it may have an impact – see at bottom)

        If you had just noted that Ortega made an accusation without evidence or explanation, that would stand on its own. However, it seems to me that you are asking us to make a judgment and come to a conclusion, and in that case I think you do have an obligation to make a case supported by evidence and reasoning – to do better than what Ortega did, and what you’re criticizing. I genuinely came here, hoping that since you’d taken up the issue, I’d find more explanation of what was behind it than I had on Ortega’s blog. Instead, when I asked you about it, I got a gruff comeback – pretty much like Ortega, come to think of it.

        Do you consciously consider it a valid justification, that if someone does something, then you are justified in doing the same sort of thing in response, to balance things out or whatever?

        p.s. You can see my latest challenge to Ortega at http://disq.us/p/1nwbi3v

        • Alanzo November 18, 2017 at 6:35 am #

          I apologize if I was gruff. I really do not have any idea why Tony Ortega would call Fiona O’Leary a vicious hate monger. All I know is that he did. And so I write about it because it illuminates a pattern with him I think more people need to know about.

          Your comment to him is awesome. If you keep it up, he will ban you. That’s another one of his patterns.

        • Marie November 20, 2017 at 4:24 pm #

          Pm ~ I didn’t know you posted here or felt that way. You taught me a lot over at Tony’s

          • PeaceMaker November 22, 2017 at 12:56 pm #

            Marie, glad to hear that my posts have contributed or been useful in some way.

            I don’t post here too often, but if I do it doesn’t necessarily mean anything in and of itself.

            p.s. Based on newer comments, it looks like we now have some idea why Ortega used the term “hatemonger” – and that there could be some question as to whether it might have some basis. But I still agree with Alanzo that he was wrong in not explaining his reasons in the first place.

          • Marie November 22, 2017 at 2:48 pm #

            Happy Thanksgiving, Pm

  3. atomical November 21, 2017 at 6:56 am #

    I have no idea why Alanzo supports this woman. Please see her long blog posts that she is written as an example: https://fionaolearyblog.wordpress.com/author/fionaolearyblog/

    I believe that is why Tony Ortega has referred to her as a “hatemonger.” She baits Nation of Islam members into answering her questions on obviously false pretenses. I have no idea why someone like Rizza would even answer her questions without doing prior research to see why she is interested in asking him about NOI and Scientology.

    I personally know Rizza and quite a number of NOI members. Regardless of how one wants to view them or their views or the views of Scientologists, berating them and calling them names and baiting them into Q&A sessions that are so extremely wrong, not to mention her blatant invasions of privacy by posting all this stuff on the Web without their consent or permission.

    If Rizza and others that she has baited into these conversations were told upfront who she is and why she wants to ask them questions, they would never have done so. Not even Tony Ortega pulls these kinds of stunts, let alone attack them with such explicit and derogatory language.

    I like this blog Alanzo and I believe it can be a helpful resource for exes and those considering leaving, but for the life of me I have no idea why you would support this individual and her blatant harassment of Scientologists and NOI members.

    Its rare that I agree with Tony O on anything, but on this, I have to agree with him 100%. Like I wrote earlier, I know Rizza and A LOT of NOI members and i have personally met and conversed with Louis Farrakhan and while I do not agree with many of their social and political views, they always treated me and other Sea Org staff and public Scientologists with the utmost respect.

    NOI is often accused of being antisemitic and racist and so forth, but not even the Anti Defamation League or the Southern Poverty Law Center go around calling them names and insulting them in the manner that Fiona has done. The issue of vaccinations and the long history of medical abuse and malpractice against African-Americans is very complex and there are reasons why so many are critical of the medical establishment and mandatory vaccinations.

    Its one thing to criticize people for opposing vaccinations and scientific consensus, but its another thing to attack and insult them.

    There is such a thing called “manners” and when someone resorts to the basest, most immature insults to attack and lambast one’s opponents, they have lost the moral high ground.

    I can virtually guarantee that this is why Tony O does not want any association with someone like Fiona. I literally became “triggered” reading her blog posts and had to stop because the hatred there for NOI and Scientologists is just too extreme for me to contend with, but there is definitely a racist taint to her attacks and insults against NOI and other prominent African-Americans who are critical of the medical and political establishment.

    Alanzo, reading her posts, you cannot tell me you believe that she is in the right and that she is actually going to convince anyone in NOI or who are influenced by their beliefs in the way she is writing?

    You don’t “wake people up” by verbally abusing them left and right. If you decide not to post my comment, then you should at least inform your readers about Fiona’s methods and language. Like I said, I can virtually guarantee that all of the above is why Tony O wants nothing to do with her or those who employ her methods.

    It is just not okay, not at all.

    • Alanzo November 21, 2017 at 11:25 am #

      I saw Fiona’s post on the NOI, and I do disagree with her rudeness. And you do have a point here.

      But I now believe that the reason Tony Ortega called her a “vicious hate-monger” and banned her and her husband from his blog is because she supports John McGhee who IS a vicious hate monger.

      Fiona believes that quack and unapproved treatments should be fought against for the good of autistic children and the public health. John McGhee believes that assaulting individual Scientologists on the street is an appropriate form of protest.

      Fiona O’Leary does not equal John McGhee

Clicky