Real Media Real Change Conference Fiasco – after the event

The outcome of the Cyber Harassment Conference run by Universal Medicine Cult ‘independent advocacy group’ RMRC, and their flexing of their legal muscles to try and spook us.

In the previous post on the spectacular failure of the Real Media Real Change Conference, I wrote that seven of the scheduled speakers cancelled their engagements when they were informed RMRC is an anti-free speech front for the Universal Medicine cult.

On the day, the cancellations numbered eight and only two of the originally scheduled speakers attended. They were Lismore mayor, Jenny Dowell and Barrister Chris Dibbs, specialist in defamation and media law and renowned for his successful case in holding Google and Yahoo liable for posting defamatory material about an individual, Michael Trkulja. From the account I was given, his hour plus talk was the highlight in an otherwise lacklustre day, where the other speakers included UniMed affiliated psychologist, Marianna Masiorski, a social media specialist from Brisbane, Tricia Munn, who our correspondent found a little overly keen to promote her business, a couple of senior constables who spoke for several whole minutes about cyber bullying in schools and Sarah Davis, convenor of RMRC.

Our correspondent was disappointed so many of the high calibre scheduled speakers had cancelled and said no explanation was given. It would have been a great line up too, and a very interesting conference had the organizers shown transparency. Media coverage of the conference so far has been lame. Although the Northern Star received tip offs about the backing of RMRC, they ran with this unrevealing story, complete with a quote from a speaker who wasn’t there.

In the meantime, RMRC organizer, Sarah Davis appears to be attempting to distance herself from the Universal Medicine cult, removing her full name and credentials from this 4,400 word apologism on the Words on Serge Benhayon blogsite. The screenshot below shows her clearly identified at the time the blog was posted and up until at least October 18th, according to googlecache.

It might lead you to believe Sarah has wised up and wants out, except that the propaganda continues on the RMRC site with the announcement that the conference was a ‘great success’. That’s not what I’d call eight out of ten speakers cancelling, and a lot of questions from journalists not from the Northern Star about cult connections. The Facebook page is also steadily filling with ‘likes’ from known cult members. Yet, Sarah has been telling journalists her connections with UM aren’t relevant, and seeking to downplay them, as evidenced above. Strange for a group that is endlessly banging on about ‘truth’. Two of their blogsites purport to specialize in it.

I also find it interesting that Sarah is quoted in NBN footage saying: ‘If you punch me in the arm, it hurts, I have a bruise, it goes away. Online bullying doesn’t go away. It’s 24/7, it stays there.’

That’s the 3rd time I’ve heard that in the last few weeks. First from audio of one of Serge Benhayon’s lectures. ‘You’ve always heard me say, I’d rather someone punch me in the arm than be nice and through that niceness express anger, because a punch you can see coming, a punch you can rub esoteric cream on and it becomes a bruise. You can put needles in, you can do all sorts of things…’

Then from another of the love-bloggers: ‘Were we taught to ignore our feelings and disregard any inner-pain as if this didn’t really exist because they were just ‘words’ and there wasn’t a bruise, break or any other obvious sign to prove these words had injured us?…My experience is that these energetic punches do bruise us over time and can affect the way in which we relate to all others as a result…’

It seems when Serge speaks, the echoes go on and on…

However, I totally disagree with Sarah’s trivializing of violence, as if it’s somehow less of an offense to punch someone than expose unpleasant truths about an exploitative organization online. I can tell you Sarah, one of the reasons I’m so stridently opposed to Universal Medicine’s pernicious behaviour is because that ovarian reading that was imposed on me by ‘The One’ hasn’t gone away. It doesn’t go away. It won’t go away. And it disgusts, horrifies and angers me just as much today as it did then. It disgusts and horrifies me more that his behaviour has been allowed to continue unchecked, and apologist promoters like yourself, knowing very well what he is like, are actively enabling him to prey on more women.

…break more families, accept the donations of assets from people who can ill afford it, damage health, hijack minds, harm children and on and on.

My theory is the whole RMRC conference was an attempt to exert some litigious muscle to try and spook us. We know millionaire messiah Serge was collecting donations for a legal fund to stave off independent critics like me. This independent critic, mind you, is a woman who was preyed upon while in a vulnerable position in Serge Benhayon’s treatment room.

Who are the bullies now, Sarah? How will it look when the multi-million dollar cult litigiously harasses a poorly resourced woman who was one of his victims?

You may have a crack defamation lawyer on the payroll now, but it doesn’t alter the facts, the evidence or your utter lack of scruples.

Even your lawyer will tell you, it doesn’t alter the truth.

Advertisements

13 thoughts on “Real Media Real Change Conference Fiasco – after the event

  1. It is totally hypocritical to form an advocacy with a group promoting honesty and transparency, and then to be involved with a group that will not allow differing opinions on their blogs (we've all tried, politely)It is clear Sarah pulling her name of knows she is aware of that hypocrisy and perhaps they have even realized that some of their blogs could be characterized as cyber-bullying.It is interesting to compare- We are basically banging on with facts- They are banging on about the fantasy that Serge is a man of immense integrity and that a few abusive men cant deal with their issues. They even go to lengths to discredit some of them in a very nasty way. I would argue, the cyber-bullying is being done by them.If they decide to go nuts and sue for defamation, they would have to hope that as a scare tactic it works, because if Serge even gets in court, he's cooked.If that happens, I am sure we can pass the hat around and raise some serious bucks. I am also aware of at least one high profile barrister who is chomping to take it on from our side.

  2. Whoo hoo 🙂 Count me in, whatever it takes and I'm more than happy to donate! 100% behind you Venus as are a lot of people who appreciate your efforts in bringing this Leonardo moron to Justice! Keep the Faith 🙂

  3. It's worth noting also that Serge has defamed and slandered many people and organizations in his presentations, everyone from Eckhart Tolle to Oprah Winfrey, along with other business owners and alternative practitioners in the Byron Bay area. If he's so concerned about defamation he should probably cease engaging in it himself, especially considering some of the indiduals in question have the connections and the financial ability to utterly ruin him in a court of law.

  4. The hypocrisy is staggering. Big scary lawyer or not, if they were going to sue me and the Words from the Families blogger they would have hit us with a writ by now. It's true – if Serge had to go to court and prove what we're saying is untrue he'd be in much much deeper doo doo. I've also heard he was above trying to sue me, but collected donations from his 'students' for a fund for their own defamation writs against us. Portraying my naming a bunch a people who openly declare their Sergophilia online as defamatory won't make much of case though.And don't get carried away with passing the hat around, lol. We're not at that stage. I also imagine if it comes down to the big bad cult going after victims and concerned families for defamation – and no, I don't have funds to hire a solicitor, let alone a QC – we'll probably have our pick of barristers who (a) hate cults and (b) have a thing for freedom of speech willing to take on a high profile case pro bono. For now though, it's business as usual at UMA exposure central – posting facts and factual analyses online.

  5. When Yvonne McIlwain of the now defunct 'Bad Beliefs and Fraudulent Faiths' blog contacted Serge in relation to her concerns about the UM cult, he also refused to reply as he felt he was 'above' responding to the questions she posed. This is yet another example of the man who claims he could defeat anyone on the planet in a debate completely lacking the courage of his deluded convictions

  6. And if that's correct, commiserations to him from UMA. I incorrectly assumed he either knew or had been tipped off by others. Next time I won't assume. Just as here, I'd rather receive the same tip off ten times than not at all. And please keep them coming, everyone. Don't assume we're omnipotent beings like Serge and see and know everything. Thx.xx

  7. K thanx, Anon, BUT, this comment is bordering on threatening and abusive and we can do without more accusations. So please don't go all Clint Eastwood or Deadwood on us. We don't condone violence, threats or abuse on UMA. By all means feel free to vent, but let's keep it non threatening. If Serge goes down, it will be due to the weight of exposed truths and the enforcement of law that brings that about. Also the $195 you're talking about would probably refer to the UM workshops, and yes that's damned expensive for one day of brainwashing. However, the RMRC conference was free to the public and funded by sponsors and well, we shall see…

  8. A reader has emailed this message about the comment above, which I'm considering deleting. I'd appreciate more feedback on this please. "Thank you for your blog. It's great. But I do question the publishing of thecomment that Anon made that was pretty hateful. I believe 100% in freespeech on the net, and who ever wrote that could start their own blog andpublish stuff like that all day for all I care, but on your blog, as a placeof information and debate where people are starting to come forward and openup and can make a real change, this sort of thing is just going feed thefires of UM that everyone speaking out against them is bitter and filledwith hate. Just my opinion though…"Thanks for your opinion and I do like to hear from as many readers as possible. You make a very good point. Anonymous has a right to be angry, a right to express that anger, but he or she does not have a right to make threats. I have a Christmas post in the making and I might write a paragraph on anger management and keeping the expressions of anger constructive.

  9. My two cents worth is that the post was probably a bit harsh. We want to support the poor people caught up in this stuff and, as we know, the followers feel as though they are an extension of Serge so when someone attacks him they feel like they are being attacked. Having said that, the poster was probably very entitled to feel that way. We just need to keep in mind what we are trying to achieve here.

  10. Thanks. I agree with both of you and appreciate the feedback. While it was difficult to draw the line, the comment isn't in keeping with what we're trying to achieve here, and I'd rather not alienate readers. It went up because I'm obviously an advocate of free speech, including my right to reply or call it out. For those who missed it, the commenter called Serge an obscene name and insinuated some vigilantism.Anon, you're welcome to comment, but any more like that will get edited or deleted.

Tell us what you think...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s