Adventures as an OSA undercover agent

Karakorum

Well-known member
Well, I know Allen is banned, but I think he might still read the forums as a guest. I asked him to provide some replies to my questions to make it a two-way comm, which he did. I thus feel it would be proper and decent to at least answer his last questions.

Don't let the tribalism in Anti-Scientology influence you.
I'm happy to take off my skull necklace and wash away the woad warpaint if that helps with the comm

If my tendency of 'being entangled in interpersonal squabbles with people who crossed" me are something you saw in my files - please let me know what you saw.
Actually that is not something from the files, rather its something I observed in your posts on the old boards and on your blog. There is certainly a lot of controversy around you. Part of this is likely because some of your opinions tend to be aligned with the opinions that Marty suddenly started to exhibit after Monique dropped the court case. But some of that I think comes from your own personal style.

The way I remember you back from the day you appeared to have this vibe of a tenacious "stand my ground" guy and it seems the CoS machine did not manage to flatten that.

So for now - how about spilling EVERYTHING you know about me, publicly, and right here on ESMB2?
There isn't much more to say. I told you about the financial 80s one that I looked at as a marginal side-task, as your name came up while I was investigating a very different person some 12 years ago. That was, from my perspective at the time a dead end: Your case was decommited and had nothing that would help me with what I was doing.
Your ethics file certainly contained more than that 80s case (I would remember otherwise, as it would be unusual just to have one single thing from over 10 years back). Whatever else was there must have been irrelevant when it comes to the task at hand that I was doing so I did not look deep into that. If there was some out-2D or out-tech stuff in your file, then I wouldn't even give it a second look at it back then, much less remember the details now after so many years.

There is no "Pre-Cult Self". You were always you.
Well in my case those two sentences are correct, but probably not in the way you intended. I am 2nd gen, born into the cult. So by definition I couldn't have had a "pre-cult self" regardless if it exists or not.

I certainly feel I did have a "pre-SO self" though. I don't think I have developed a "post-SO self", but maybe its too soon for that. I mean what is a decade between friends, right?


So this is my honest last reply. End of comm I guess.
 

UTR

Celestial Spork
Well, you all gave him a chance. It's too bad, because he did seem to make some good points every now and then. But the way he attacked people and twisted words really made it difficult to take anything he said seriously.
 

HelluvaHoax!

Well-known member
.
....
....
....
So this is my honest last reply. End of comm I guess.
.

Good guess!

Later if you still feel the need, you can always go look online for a necromancy discussion group. They might be more interested in your efforts to channel the ghost of long-gone BT (Banned Troll).

.
 
Last edited:

Karakorum

Well-known member
Is he a friend or your mentor? Just askin'.
I knew him from way back when he was at the Santa Monica mission. Certainly not a mentor, we never worked in the same parts of Scn, moreover he was already gone by the time I started doing serious things with the SO.
 

Lone Star

Well-known member
Well once again I missed out on the "fun" as it played out in real-time.

I want to commend everyone here who handled Alanzo with pure standard ASC tech. VWD! A commendation will be put in your ethics file.
 

Dotey OT

Dis-Membered
Thanks, ITYIWT.

I only very rarely take down anything. I try to write about what I feel is important to write about.

Don't you?

Somebody asked me why I don't just stick to criticizing Scientology, and never criticize Anti-Scientology or AntiCultism.

Here's the best way for me to describe it.

To just stick to criticizing or examining Scientology, and never anti-Scientology, is like just criticizing Trump. Or Just criticizing Hillary.

You leave out criticizing or examining the Republican party, or the Democratic party.

You leave out criticizing or examining the corporate welfare/political donations system of both candidates and their parties. You leave out criticizing and examining the American Perpetual War machine and the iniquities of capitalism.

If you leave out examining all that and just focus on Trump, or just focus on Hillary, you'll never get to see the wider picture, and the wider causes.

You'll just spin around in a little squirrel cage, and you'll go crazy.

So yeah, where Exes do something worth criticizing, I criticize them. I praise them as well, but few see that.

You have to look at everything.

Or at least I have to.
...and when questioned about his practice of skewering scientology critics, HE WHIPS IT OUT. Anti-scientology.
 

Dotey OT

Dis-Membered
Reason is achieved on a case by case basis.

The truth about anything is BOTH the good and the bad. Not just the good. And not just the bad.

I've been out for 20 years. I can tell you that, at first, railing against all the bad in Scientology felt very good - especially after never being allowed to acknowledge any of the bad as a Scientologist.

But after a while of being out, as I've written in my bio, I began to see the same tribalism in Anti-Scientology that I saw in Scientology. And I also saw how Anti-Scientology uses some of the same tactics used in the Church against people who now and then mention the good in Scientology. Both being forced to say only the good, and being forced to say only the bad, begins to corrode your soul.

In both, you are not dealing with the truth.

There are no "sides" to the truth. Thus, the truth is NEVER tribal.

It was very bad for me to not be allowed to investigate, examine and write about whatever I wanted. I found that my loyalties to both Scientology as a scientologist, and my loyalties to Antis were making me blind and hysterical. And I realized that this is a very unsustainable way for me to live.

Just like in the story above, as a Scientologist, I tried to understand the Cult Awareness Network members in the bar. This led me to be called "worthless" etc by OSA personnel Carol Brookes and Randy Kretchmar.

Well guess what? I didn't give a shit then, and I don't give a shit now.

I try to be more loyal to the truth, than to any person or group.

I've learned that this is the most sustainable way for me to live my life - especially as an Ex-Scientologist.
Then comes out the word "Tribalism". As long as he can couch the criticism of what he is doing in this manner, and it appears that this is what he wants, he is golden.
 

Mockingbird

Well-known member
I just saw a comment about Alanzo getting banned from here and tracked down this thread and read the whole thing, or at least skimmed it.

I saw he was posting here a couple weeks ago and was frankly aggravated. Lots of people have had disagreements in the past at ESMB and sometimes not handled everything with perfect maturity. I certainly am one of them. I have posted comments before that I regretted and many that I hope I would not post now.

It is part of life to be imperfect. But, and I have a huge butt, er but, Alanzo's behavior to me is at a totally different level.

He didn't just make less than considerate remarks or step in toes. He wasn't just immature or insensitive.

He flat out attacked and tried to destroy people over and over again.

One example that I had several extremely negative interactions with him over in Facebook groups is relevant.

He has written over and over on his favorite term tribal. He is describing several cognitive biases and logical fallacies all at once with the word and when you describe something as much as he does with that one term you should really reference the research and evidence regarding it in my opinion.

That way people can realize you don't have unique insight and they can look at and think about the evidence and arguments for the idea themselves and evaluate your claims for themselves instead of being spoonfed your opinion.

Research that Robert Sapolsky described in his book Behave and in several YouTube videos proposes that we tend to overestimate the similarity of items in the same category and simultaneously to underestimate the similarity of items in different categories habitually.

Okay, in plain English we think stuff with the same label is equal and stuff with different labels is totally different, even when it's not.

If we are asked about for example which city is furthest north and given lists of American and Canadian cities we on average think of the Canadian cities as ALL being further north than the American ones even though some Canadian cities are actually further south than some American cities but overall the category of Canada in general is further north.

So, Alanzo latches onto this one idea from psychology and hammered people into not using the term cult because it is a category and thinking of it as a category would make them subject to inaccuracies in thinking about Scientology. I didn't agree but accepted his framing. Okay.

Then he talks out the other side of his mouth and calls the people at the Underground Bunker "Tony Ortega's cult" right after explaining how you can never call Scientology a cult !

When I specifically laid out the whole issue to him on Facebook he replied that he laughs at the reaction he gets when he calls those people a cult and he does it for fun ! He wants to be a Scientology apologist and use a facade of being a crusader for critical thinking and intellectual purity to cover bashing people for calling the Scientology cult a cult but his facade is set aside when he can aggravate people by calling Scientology critics a cult !

When he did that I knew he lost any slim chance that I was gonna respect or trust him right there.

That was years ago. When I saw that he was here I thought about bringing it all up again but knew he would just blow me off, so I decided to focus on putting out what I wanted to and not wasting my time getting aggravated by him.

I am glad he is banned frankly, because I think he likes aggravating people and trolling to troll. He in my opinion doesn't talk to people in good faith.
 

Karakorum

Well-known member
He has written over and over on his favorite term tribal. He is describing several cognitive biases and logical fallacies all at once with the word and when you describe something as much as he does with that one term you should really reference the research and evidence regarding it in my opinion.
Yeah I saw "tribal" and "tribalism" being thrown a lot recently, even C.Shelton used it and most of the time he's being a very rational and level-headed guy (well, unless he starts talking about far-left politics...)

"Tribalism" now feels like the new "fascism". A random adjective people start to throw around when they want to insult someone who does not agree with their viewpoint. The word starts to lose its original meaning.

So, Alanzo latches onto this one idea from psychology and hammered people into not using the term cult because it is a category and thinking of it as a category would make them subject to inaccuracies in thinking about Scientology. I didn't agree but accepted his framing. Okay.

Then he talks out the other side of his mouth and calls the people at the Underground Bunker "Tony Ortega's cult" right after explaining how you can never call Scientology a cult !

When I specifically laid out the whole issue to him on Facebook he replied that he laughs at the reaction he gets when he calls those people a cult and he does it for fun ! He wants to be a Scientology apologist and use a facade of being a crusader for critical thinking and intellectual purity to cover bashing people for calling the Scientology cult a cult but his facade is set aside when he can aggravate people by calling Scientology critics a cult !

When he did that I knew he lost any slim chance that I was gonna respect or trust him right there.

That was years ago. When I saw that he was here I thought about bringing it all up again but knew he would just blow me off, so I decided to focus on putting out what I wanted to and not wasting my time getting aggravated by him.

I am glad he is banned frankly, because I think he likes aggravating people and trolling to troll. He in my opinion doesn't talk to people in good faith.
Yeah he was behaving oddly... to say the least. I'm curious why he so strongly jumped at me when I mentioned I worked with continental ethics. Its as if some switch flipped in his mind and he started repeatedly asking me about that old stuff.
I wonder if he really wanted to get some answer, or was he trying to fish for some information that could help OSA identify me.
TO be clear: I have no evidence Alanzo has anything to do with OSA. I'm being cautious because some of his statements tend to align with Marty and others who push the "anti-scientology cult" stuff. Plus I'm paranoid - I always was.


And now, a special message to OSA:
Dearest "People of the Lie" - if you are reading this and still don't know who you are dealing with, then you are an even greater bunch of sorry losers than you were back in the day. Go back and ask Inv for help, they'll have a good laugh :clapping:

 
Last edited:
Top