Great Comments From the Post-Scientology Internet: “You’re Out Ethics”!


Great comments don’t have to be ones that I agree with.

They just have to express their own viewpoint in a powerful way.

This one came from Marty’s blog just a few days ago by the commenter: “Disappointed”.

He does such a good job of expressing himself, his post needs no further intro from me:

Disappointed | October 30, 2014 at 4:23 am |

“Are you all kidding me? I doubt this post will ever get posted here, but I have to try.’

“I have been offline from scientology for a number of years. I don’t actually even have the best track record, but I’m online looking around to see what’s up with everything and I come across multiple blogs from former high ranking scientologists who are trying to blaze some new trail.’

“Let me state it clearly, I know scientology works. I am going to go back to the org for services. I don’t believe any of this stuff any of you are saying and if whatever of it is true, is most likely exaggerated. I am not happy with this independent scientologist crap.’

“I especially am not happy with you Marty Rathburn. What the hell? You got videos saying you can mix scientology with other philosophies? Maybe you ought to read KSW again, seems like you need a refresher.’

“Okay let me start fresh. Obviously there is a some grand beef with David miscavige that every blown sea org member seem to be a victim to. I find this funny since DM is like 5 foot nothing? You all have the courage to blow scientology and natter to the press, but no one had the balls to smack him back? Maybe that’s how he knew you were out-ethics, if he laid a hand on me, I’d a knocked his lights out. Damn the consequences. So your story of, he wouldn’t stop hitting me so I had to get out just doesn’t add up.’

“Also Marty, you realize that some of these clowns responding to your posts are ACTUAL SP’s right?’

“I hate to come on here and make everyone wrong, but damn…. Wake up!’

“Get your asses back into the org and get your ethics in and get back onto the bridge. Stop cry-babying about over regging, if you don’t have the damn money, tell them and be strong about it. It’s a game, just a game.’

“As for the all the accusations that tech is out by Debbie Cook and others, BS, BS, BS. I disagree. I have plenty of friends who are going up the bridge and getting BIG wins and they are not complaining.’

“I am probably going to be met with all kinds of negative response to my message here (if marty is bold enough to post it) but I don’t care. I have integrity. This is integrity. I will be loyal to the church.’

“I mean after all, okay, lets say you all destroy the church and it crumbles and all that’s left is “independent Scientologists” How are you going to get access to the upper levels beyond OT8 and further, since for OT9 and OT10 to get released there needs to be ideal orgs everywhere per LRH, how do you plan on making that a reality when you destroy everything.’

“You all aren’t revolutionaries, you’re out ethics.”

You can see it here:

Maybe it was just a troll – a person taking on the character of a blinkered cultist on the Internet, like Jack Nicholson as a hard-ass Marine commander.

If so, it was an awesome performance.

7 thoughts on “Great Comments From the Post-Scientology Internet: “You’re Out Ethics”!”

  1. Alanzo, given your long, storied history as a staunch critic of scientology, i was surprised to see that you had little to say about this amazing post. I expected that you would have ripped him a new one, for being a “brainwashed cultie”. Well, a few things came to me, as I read this post:

    1. If the guy is such a dedicated Scn, why was he offlines for “a number of years”?

    2. If the guy was offline for so many years, how is it he is so certain about the current state of the church?

    3. He calls “Marty Rathbun”, “Marty Rathburn”, which seems to indicate that he is intentionally mis-spelling the name, so he doesn’t seem like an OSA bot; or he really IS out of the loop and really doesn’t know what he is talking about.

    4. It is interesting that he talks about DM’s size and that he would have “knocked his lights out”; which doesn’t sound like an OSA bot. And yet, on the other hand, it sounds completely out of touch with reality, as many people have explained very clearly why they never took such action against DM.

    5. He makes a good point about being strong enough to resist the registrars; however, this, once again, demonstrates how out of touch this guy is. Anyone who isn’t coughing up the dough is definitely in for some sec checking or other coercive cycles. So Scns either donate voluntarily or they donate involuntarily, through endless sec checks. So it sounds good on paper to simply “say no”; but, in fact, it does not seem that simple for those who have actually tried to do that. Minimally, you will lose ur status and will be looked down upon, if you are not donating. So you may have integrity, but you will no longer have the support of the group you’re supposed to be a part of.

    6. How can he possibly disagree that the tech is out?? His only indication is “wins from others”. However, if the guy has been offline for so many years, I am not sure exactly how he has so many friends winning up the bridge. And if he had maintained those connections while offline, obviously that doesn’t sound right either. I mean: Why would these Scn in good standing be in comm with an obvious out-ethics DB who is offline?? Seems like something not quite right here. And, regardless, all you have to do is look at the changes in what an “F/N” is, to see just one *major* alteration of the technology.

    7. The most chilling comment from this poster was his statement that he “will be loyal to the church”. Again, sounds good on paper. This would seem to go along with the “Code of Honor”. However, it is so absolute, as to be ridiculous. Is he suggesting that, no matter what, he will remain loyal? If so, then this is not a free-thinker, but someone living in delusion. Loyalty is admirable; but I think it matters to what one is being loyal. That is: I believe loyalty should be conditional.

    8. Clearly the guy has NOT informed himself about Scn OT levels beyond OT VIII. But, most importantly [despite being offline for so long], he seems surprisingly informed about current church projects, given his comments about all orgs being “ideal”, in order to release more OT levels. Years ago (when he might have been online) the focus was on St Hill sized orgs, in order to release upper levels. Given that the current ideal org strategy is totally off-policy, no way he could have the viewpoint he expressed, without relatively recent indoctrination by the church. And the fact that he doesn’t understand how off-policy the Ideal Org strategy is tells me he must not be trained in “admin tech”. So it is surprising how certain he sounds about everything.

    In closing, I found this one of the most amazing and saddest posts I have ever read; because it is likely very representative of the current mind set of church members. This means that, despite LRH’s best efforts, clearly, his Scientologists are not the “free people” he said he wanted them to be.


    • Impressive comment, Mr Jackson.

      I think you pretty much nailed it.

      And welcome to Alanzo’s blog! I hope to see more of your intelligent analysis around these parts!


      • I wish you would all pack your shit and get on your crazy train and take a ride. Then we’ll nuke the train ; and rid this world of garbage. Go crawl in a hole you shit eaters!!!!




  2. I don’t think this is the rantings of an OSA-bot. And what he says about himself maybe quite true. The fact that it includes contradictory data supports the assumption that this guy is in fact a real Scnist.

    True believers just can’t be bothered with facts or observable evidence. Regardless of the church’s actions or condition, the true believer feels it is best to just keep on believing. The prospect of not having something like the church is just too much to confront. So, regardless of what harm they are doing, it seems anything is better than nothing.

Comments are closed.