When media scrutiny intensified earlier this year, SergeProp got to work dusting up UM’s public image lest negative publicity slow their plans for global domination. It appears since August, at least one of their brains-trust has been hard at work inaugurating a media lobby group Real Media Real Change and a special conference on Cyber Harassment. They went so far as to invite distinguished academics to speak. Only problem was, they didn’t disclose RMRC is an anti free speech front for a harmful cult.
RMRC describes itself as an ‘independent advocacy group focused on bringing awareness to the real world effects of new and traditional media practices on people and communities.’ Ironically, one of its catchphrases is ‘Freedom of Speech is not an excuse for harm’, an echo from the UM love blogs. When run through the reality testing device it translates as ‘Freedom of speech is not an excuse for exposing the facts about us and hampering our recruitment drive.’
And when seven of the scheduled speakers were given the facts about the organization behind RMRC, they promptly pulled out. No doubt SergeCorp will blame the media, us cyber bullies and hate-bloggers, a few disgruntled males, The Lords of Form, cats and probably Eckhardt Tolle.
The RMRC Cyber Harassment Conference fiasco
After the first run of news reports on UM in July this year, apart from assailing media organizations with Esoteric love and threats of legal action, our regular readers know SergeProp also went to work on a handful of ‘disgruntled males’ they believe are engineering all the bad press. Apart from being labelled ‘abusers’ these men, who have experienced the breakdown of relationships and the fragmentation of their families, were also accused of ‘cyber bullying’ – harassing an embattled millionaire cult leader.
Part of UniMed’s campaign was to form a cyber lynch mob, complete with righteous cult dentist Dr Rachel Hall and cult doctor Dr Anne Malatt, to vilify two Bangalow fathers, including Lance. Prohibited a right of reply on the ‘Truth About Universal Medicine’ site, he exercised his freedom of speech here to provide a dignified response. Also, twice on this site, SergeHuggers have questioned my gender, even after I’ve written up my account of the ovarian reading Serge imposed on me, asked questions of Serge and his followers about how they excuse his vile sexual transgressions, and called them to task on their derogatory pretences at feminism. I never receive any coherent responses apart from pass agg swipes on their blogs about cyber bullying and insinuations they’ve tried to get Google to shut me and the Words from the Families blog down.
But I’m only one among a growing number of private citizens working to expose UM’s catalogue of questionable practices and litany of harms. I’m one cranky battleaxe asking some questions publicly, but behind the scenes concerned and conscientious people are tunnelling away beneath the crumbling edifice that is Universal Medicine, digging up the bones. The exposure of Real Media Real Change happened when someone got wind of UM’s latest putrid PR scheme, jumped on the phone, and stayed on the phone until the job was done. Over the last days the Telstra network in several states has lit up like Chevy Chase’s Christmas tree, and RMRC’s conference on Cyber Harassment is verging on collapse with the majority of its invited speakers pulling out.
Who knew a couple of disgruntled Bangalow Dads had such reach?
But the real question is when will Universal Medicine’s apologists snap out of their collective cognitive dissonance?
No doubt many of them will continue to insist they’re not in a cult and interpret the failure of RMRC as the fault of biased media reporting and a successful cyber hate campaign. In spite of the fact academics and experts representing a number of institutions and disciplines are often well known for their research capabilities and being able to think for themselves. Although, in terms of hate, it’s probably pretty accurate to say most people do hate oppressive, arrogant cliques who deceive, manipulate, exploit and embezzle vulnerable people.
It’s extraordinary SergeProp thought no one would twig to what they were up to, even after they’ve been filling up the internet with ample evidence of their real agenda – to suppress the damaging facts about UM. It was obvious not only from their prolific, repetitive, falsehood riddled propaganda, but from their abundant glaring omissions and evasions. Such as prohibiting critical comments on their sites, never answering our questions and refusing to be interviewed by the media.
It’s more extraordinary they thought they could manipulate high level experts working in the areas of media and law. SergeProp thought they could throw around assertions about ‘freedom of speech’ and yet behave with no transparency, not disclosing their true backing, not disclosing their motivations for inviting speakers to the conference, and not revealing their exceedingly ‘Esoteric ideas’ on ‘Freedom of Speech’, which are essentially carte blanche for them to publicly post every kind of lie and deception on their protected sites, while denying all others a right of reply.
Cognitive dissonance is a euphemism in the case of Universal Medicine. It’s more like delusional audacity.
Aim versus outcome – the rupture
This underhanded manipulation and attempted exploitation of experts to push UM’s censorious cause reminds me of many groups who have attracted the endorsement of various luminaries in some of their more vigorous and critical recruitment stages. Even Jim Jones, architect and perpetrator of the horrendous Jonestown massacre enjoyed the public support of a Presidential candidate, a state Governor, and first lady, Rosalynn Carter.
It also appears Serge Benhayon is increasingly mimicking Scientology’s business model, branching into front organizations to push his agenda. For example Scientology has long used a front ironically called the Citizens’ Commission on Human Rights to attack psychiatry – merely because psychiatry has been one of the main threats to Scientology’s credibility. Serge appears to be adopting Hubbard’s policy of ‘attack the attacker‘, attempting to limit exposure by having his followers attack his critics. I don’t doubt Serge thought they could pull it off. He believed he could garner support as a precious cyber victim by deceiving experts to do his bidding, in what would be a very right wing stab at law reform.
Yet, even Malcolm Turnbull, (conservative) opposition spokesman for communications has ruled out support of new laws to bolster privacy, arguing for more rather than less freedom, and that ‘social media campaigns had held broadcasters like Alan Jones to account more effectively than regulators.’
RMRC/Universal Medicine’s push for controls on the media, and limits to internet freedom are concealed in false concerns for real victims of harassment. When SergeProp whines ad nauseum about cyber bullies and trolls they conflate criminal acts of cyber-bullying such as online racial villification, trolling of facebook memorial pages and the posting of pornographic images taken without consent, with legitimate and lawful work by the news media, myself and my colleagues in informing the public of the brutal facts on the nature of UM and its dangerous and exploitative activities. Whether by delusion or overt contempt, Serge and his enablers conveniently disregard those he has victimized – the families he’s decimated, the once sound minds and bodies his pernicious ‘healing’ has vandalized, the patients he has abused and the funds and assets he has pillaged from the vulnerable.
Freedom of Speech is not an excuse to harm?
Serge’s perceived cyber-victimhood pales beside the very real damage he’s done to people physically, psychologically and financially, and the harm which is expanding through the growth of UM.
And how about this beauty from the RMRC site?
We are inspired by the possibility that humanity might one day have a Media that puts people before ‘page views’ and paper sales.
We’re similarly inspired to hope that medicine and healing might not be misrepresented by a ruthless cult that puts profits and the prestige of the guru before human health and wellbeing.
From our point of view, freedom of speech is crucial in putting an end to the harm. For the benefit of SergeProppers who remain confused about defamation law, I’ll repost just one pertinent section:
The defamation law recognises a number of circumstances in which the interest in the material being published outweighs the potential damage to a reputation. These are codified in terms of defences to defamation actions which include:
Justification: It is a complete defence to an action for defamation to prove that the defamatory statement is substantially true. Substantial truth means that provided the justification meets the substance of the imputation, minor inaccuracy will not exclude the defence. The publisher’s motive is irrelevant, if the publisher can show that the imputation is true then it does not matter that he/she was motivated by malice.
In the end, I believe freedom of speech and expression can win. We all know the internet isn’t perfect and like most human endeavours, including medicine, can do immense harm when used with corrupt intent. But the net is also an unprecedented boon for disseminating information, exposing fraud and calling public menaces like Universal Medicine to account. Scientology might not be what it is today if the internet had been around during its major growth phases, and if those who recognized the potential for harm had the law on side and these very democratic tools to communicate with each other, form united fronts and promulgate the facts.
See also: Real Media Real Change Conference Fiasco – after the event
Thanks for this update, Venus. I suppose such totalitarian attempts at silencing critics should come as no surprise from a man who endorses book burning.
Thanks for this excellent post.
If anyone went to the RMRC conference, we'd love a report. Let us know your impressions here, or use the contact tab at top of page. Also, could anyone see my facebook post on the RMRC page? I don't understand FB. Whenever I check the site, the comment isn't there, but last night it was there with 11 likes. Bless. Then gone when I looked again this morning. Is that an FB glitch or do you suppose the Lords of Form spiked my cocoa?And for the record, I do moderate comments, but have only blocked 3 or 4 – one from a Sergehugger and I think it was another two with no love for Serge. The idea of moderation here is so that the lovebloggers can't hassle or derail survivors or anyone adversely affected by UM. Expressions of opinion or feeling or whatever are welcome from either side, and so are replies, which I guess is why we don't hear from SergeProp anymore. They can't withstand answering to those outside the group. Their apologism doesn't hold up – particularly when confronted with facts.
Hey Venus 🙂 Thought the conference was on tonight? Will Leonardo De Fuckwit be there! Might be worth flying up there just for the chance of meeting up with him and saying hello!!! In a nice way of course 😉
Nup, it's already over. Waiting for word on the wire…Leonardo wouldn't have been there anyway. It's a front! And apparently Sarah's been doing a song and dance about how her cult connections, profuse 4500 word apologisms on the loveblogs and the fact that all the facebook likes are from UMers aren't RELEVANT to RMRC. Lord knows when she was planning to tell the speakers he's the one RMRC IS defending from cyber-bullying. Cyber bullying mind you – from a woman he attempted to assault in his treatment room. Tsk!
I can't see iyour comment. Given the censorious approach taken on alll other UM blogs I doubt they will allow two way discussion of a critical nature on the RMRC pages.
Okay, word from an attendee at the conference. He didn't know RMRC was cult connected until after the show and had been rather surprised most of the billed speakers had cancelled at late notice, and was under impressed that one unbilled, so called media 'expert' seemed there to promote her own business. He said it was a good thing it was free because if he'd paid, he'd want his money back. There were a couple of sheepish police senior constables who spoke very briefly about their liaising with schools on cyber bullying, the mayor of Lismore, and I think our correspondent said Sarah spoke after lunch. Plus registered psychologist Marianna Masiorski, who he later found through google has a post on one of the love blogs. Thx. Naming Names page here she comes. He said Chris Dibb, the barrister who'd successfully sued Google spoke at length about defamation – over an hour – and that was really interesting.It would have been a great lineup if they'd secured all the speakers. Try transparency next time, Sarah.