Robert Earl Burton founded The Fellowship of Friends in the San Francisco Bay Area in 1970.

Burton modeled his own group after that of Alex Horn, loosely borrowing from the Fourth Way teachings of Gurdjieff and Ouspensky. In recent years, the Fellowship has cast its net more broadly, embracing any spiritual tradition that includes (or can be interpreted to include) the notion of "presence."

The Fellowship of Friends exhibits the hallmarks of a "doomsday religious cult," wherein Burton exercises absolute authority, and demands loyalty and obedience. He warns that his is the only path to consciousness and eternal life. Invoking his gift of prophecy, he has over the years prepared his flock for great calamities (e.g. a depression in 1984, the fall of California in 1998, nuclear holocaust in 2006, and an ominous, yet unspecified new threat late in 2018.) While non-believers shall perish, through the direct intervention and guidance from 44 angels (including his divine father, Leonardo da Vinci) Burton and his followers will be spared, founding a new, and more perfect civilization.

Many regard Robert Earl Burton a narcissist and sociopath, surrounded by a largely greed- and power-driven inner circle. The following pages offer abundant evidence supporting that conclusion.

This archive draws
on official Fellowship publications and websites,
news archives, court documents, cult education and awareness forums, the (former) Fellowship Wikipedia page, the long-running Fellowship of Friends - Living Presence Discussion, the Internet Archive, the (former) Fellowship of Friends wiki project, and the editor's own 13-year experience in the Fellowship.

Presented in a reverse chronology, the Fellowship's history may be navigated via the "Blog Archive" located in the sidebar below.

Friday, January 1, 2010

The Queen of the Night* moonlights in forensics

* From Mozart's much-beloved opera "The Magic Flute", of course.

[ed. - "Daily Cardiac's" instruction inspired the following video:]

[ed. - In a move reminiscent of Whole Foods CEO John Mackey anonymously trolling on Yahoo! forums to bash his competitor, former Fellowship of Friends President, Linda Kaplan , formerly Linda Tulisso, has been defending the "Church's honor" on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog, posting as "Daily Cardiac". Here Cardiac applies her scientific acumen to utterly demolish the damning testimonies of "ex-FOFers". The following post led to a riot of observations about not only her ignorance, but also her lack of "a certain experience". This is a true gem.]  

Posted by "Daily Cardiac" on the Fellowship of Friends Discussion blog:
Moderator – 219 [blogger and post number]: “Please share with us some of the “so many fictions”. I’m quite curious”
ton – 220: “it’s good of you to be so concerned with the welfare of ex-members… now i’ll take my tongue from my cheek and ask you a question: would you give some examples of the “many fictions and make up stro[r]ies that never took place…"
Ames – 223: “If you can indeed identify the ‘so many fictions and make up stories from direct personal knowledge’, I strongly encourage you to go right ahead.”
What’s “curious”, to quote the Moderator, or perhaps “curiouser” to quote LC [Lewis Carroll], is the interest in wanting to hear about what Someone [blog poster] has to say about “fictions” making their way to the blog.
For one thing I’d have to take the interest indicated in the above quotes as being facetious or sarcastic in nature rather than sincere; as no ex member on this blog has ever weighed (at least not over the blog) the correctness or truthfulness of any comment by anyone being remotely tolerant or supportive of the FoF/RB. Forget about agreeing with the comments, they have not been admitted on any level as being credible or even possible.
It can be assumed that in the entire 87 pages of the blog not one opponent of FoF/RB has ever admitted or acknowledged that any supporter’s comments were true or valid if the supporter’s comments were expressing something positive or favorable. I have not read every single posting, but in the many I have read I have not encountered such an occurrence. It could be further stated that all positive or favorable postings about FoF/RB have been refuted or dismissed by one or more opponents as an out right lie or a delusional comment. And out of all the negative or unfavorable postings by ex members not once has an FoF opponent ever disputed or disagreed with the findings of another opponent. [ed. - this is far from true.]
Another way of stating this is that according to ex member testimony all negative or unfavorable postings about RB are true, and all favorable or positive postings by current members or supporters are false. If one simply considers the pure mathematics of it one would conclude that the odds of this being the case are pretty slim. If anyone uncovers an exchange between opponent and supporter here that would disprove this supposition please post it.
What’s interesting in this latest instance is that Someone is also an ex member who, by his or her own account, has no interest in going back to the FoF or supporting RB but only dared to point something out to Bruce regarding the zealous nature of his comments after being out of the organization for close to 30 years, and concluding that there was a certain level of obsession going on. And actually Someone, as I read their post, was not being difficult or demeaning in any way but was coming from a place of trying to offer an honest observation.
Bruce, being Bruce, dismissed Someone’s contentions that he or she, based on Bruce’s own postings, could actually perceive legitimate insights into Bruce’s reality. But Bruce and several others make this claim on a daily basis about my reality, as well as the realities of anyone they disagree with.
So my question to others is – does this apparent contradiction bother anyone else? If as Bruce contends Someone cannot draw accurate insights from what he says how is it possible that Bruce and others claim to do precisely this on a routine basis? This seems to be the stuff of fiction to me.
But it is typical of many posters here to recoil from any hint of error in judgment or misinformation on their part; which, contrary to their beliefs, does not lend more credence to their contributions but only stamps them as being inflexible and delusional with regard to their own beliefs.
Regarding Someone’s assertions about fictions on the blog; obviously anything he or she proposes could be contested just like anything said in opposition of FoF can be contested. As I’ve said numerous times nothing written here can be either proved or disproved; this is the case for blogs in general. And any statement can be contested or sanctioned.
I would offer one example of a fiction, and a glaring one at that.
This regards a comment by A.T. some time ago. A.T. commented that she was seated next to RB at a Salon dinner and detected the smell of semen on his breath as he leaned over to speak to her. She further stated that he must have performed fellatio on a student immediately before entering the Salon.
This posting was one of the most lauded and praised comments at the time and actually it is one of the easiest to expose as being bogus in nature. The reason it is so transparently fictitious is because in order for it to be true laws of physics would have to be broken.
First of all semen is not toxic or a waste matter and hence gives off no strong odor. In fact it contains half of the Life Force and as such is the most refined fluid in the human organism. It contains no airborne aromatic properties, unlike many herbs or other plants/flowers, minerals, compounds.
If an open container of semen would have been placed on the dining table it could not have been easily detected by smell, if at all. But the real truth can be drawn from the fact that semen is immediately broken down by acids and enzymes found in saliva and any traces of it would have been dissolved within a few seconds.
Yet A. T. would have us believe that after every one was seated at the table and after a 15 minute concert was performed and the time it took for the food to arrive (which does produce strong aromas) and a toast proposed, and somewhat later, probably after a few bites of food were taken, as Robert leaned over and spoke to A she was taken aback with the undeniable smell of semen on his breath.
This is just one fiction, made evident by laws of physics. Many other examples are just as evident because they bypass laws of reason and probability, but those laws being more abstract are more easily dismissed by an unreasoned mind.
The chief fiction on the blog is that the FoF is a destructive cult and RB a charlatan. Of course it can’t be proved or disproved on this blog, and the truth or falsity of it can only be verified on a personal level.
It’s a spiritual matter and can only be known on an earthly plane by those who rise up to a state of cognition where spiritual matters can be distinguished and separated from earthly matters.
I’ll admit it’s tempting for people to think they can determine with surety just what an organization that claims to be spiritual in nature really is or is not.
But there are only two ways (that I know) to distinguish the spiritual from the earthly: By raising one’s state to the level where one can be in communion with spirit matter or by waiting until one’s death when spirit matter in us is separated from our bodies and we are shown many realities previously mysterious to us.
But in any event one day we will all know everything there is to know about RB and FoF.
[ed. - If "Daily Cardiac" can be so wrong about semen, do you think she could possibly be wrong about the other "fictions"? For more lessons from "Daily Cardiac", see "'Daily Cardiac' helps us understand consensual sex".]

No comments:

Post a Comment