INVITATIONS TO HATE
dors...@my-deja.com
Scientology in this forum, it is an invitation to hate. It is a small
list of people, made up of even smaller minds and even narrower
spiritual enlightenment.
The list of locals such as Android, Kaeli, Gregg, Wulfen, Mike Argue
and some inconstant supporters make up a minority of people ACTUALLY
in battle or war with my church. Their reasons are spurious and the
intent is to invite hatred. That is and are the actions of bigots.
No matter what pretext is used, no matter what derrogatory or
inflammatory language or "information" is used - it is an invitation to
hate. Nothing more.
While it can be hoped that these individuals could and would turn over
a "new leaf" so to speak and just get on with their lives and do
something constructive with it, this does not appear to be their intent
nor their inclination. Their inclination is to foment hate and to
villify any decent, reasoning group - which just so happens to disagree
with their vile behavior both in this forum and outside it.
Their personal lives are filled with mistakes, tragedies, medical drug
use to "temper" this same unreasonableness they not only conduct in
this forum - but their own lives. Why else would one "contribute" to
such a morass of hate inspired and bigoted views. Not a ONE of them
have any interest of participation or contributing for the greater good
of others, and so they fight us.
While there is the invitation to hate them because of their destructive
and annoying behavior, I do not. If they were reasonable men & women,
we could agree to disagree and get on with what each of us DOES believe
in. This is not the case. These are not reasonable men and women,
despite their protestaions to the contrary. They are bigots. Pure and
simple.
While they continue to fight us, we will continue to fight for our
rights...and theirs too. Not in this forum so much as in the halls of
government and seeking fair play and justice to pursue our life, our
liberty and our happiness - as we see fit. They (bigots) are entitled
to these same rights and unfortunately, do nothing to earn them.
This post is for the reasonable men and women. For we can agree to
disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong - when
we are. The same cannot be said for the insane. THAT is what this
forum is made up of...nothing more.
Dorsai666
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Chris Leithiser
Much better, Dan. Whoever wrote this for you has a firmer grasp on
grammar and writing than you do--and spells better, too. Better
vocabulary, too.
I understand that he/she only stepped in because you've been fucking up
here too often, but you might consider letting him continue to write
your stuff for you. Then you won't have to be so embarrassed to sign
your name to the posts.
Even Hubbard sounded coherent when his ghostwriters "smoothed things
over" for him.
A few suggestions, though: your writer still writes too much in the
passive voice. There was still a grammatical mistake, but it's a common
one and forgivable. One of the two spelling errors is likely a
typo--and you probably did a cut-and-paste, so I'm sure neither was
_your_ fault. But "what" is it about the quote marks?
Pity about the logic, but then, your "ghost" was also a $cientologist,
right? Not his fault, then, he simply has switched off parts of the
brain having to do with logical thinking.
But as for an "invitation to hate" (see, that's the _proper_ use of
quote marks, to set off a direct quotation) you might ask yourself just
what is it that causes you to hate so freely? Like the guy who objected
to the shrink's pornographic inkblots, you project too much, methinks.
DeoMorto
>This post is for the reasonable men and women. For we can agree to
>disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong - when
>we are.
have you ever made a post where you have admitted you were wrong?
have you ever made a post where you admitted that the CofS had done anything
wrong?
Your answer, I fear, supports your contention that only the truly insane can
never admit to a mistake.
Semper ubi sub ubi
mimus
>This post is for the reasonable men and women. For we can agree to
>disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong - when
>we are. The same cannot be said for the insane. THAT is what this
>forum is made up of...nothing more.
Reasonableness is "out-ethics", innit?
I saw
many people
reduced to
incoherent babbling,
stripping off clothes,
crawling around on the ground,
banging heads, limbs and other body parts
against furniture and walls,
barking,
losing all sense of one's identity
and intense and persistent suicidal ideation.
--Declaration of Andre Tabayoyon
I'm an OT.--Lisa McPherson
If you imagine 40-50 Scientologists
posting on the Internet every few days,
we'll just run the SP's right off the system.
It will be quite simple, actually.
--Elaine Siegel, OSA INT (1996)
Case 5/BTLA/SP1/BAD
Terra Xenu
yduzitmatter
1. Does Scientology cause people to disconnect from their families?
2. Does Scientology teach that your IQ will improve and that you will
gain control over MEST?
3. Does Scientology use practices that are potentially dangerous to
people's health and well being?
4. Does Scientology teach that anyone who dares criticize it is a
criminal?
5. Has the church, and/or individual members ever been convicted of
crimes against critics?
6. Has Scientology ever been caught with its hands in Government files?
7. Does the COS hire PI's to stalk, harass, and wreak havoc in peoples'
lives - just because they criticize it?
8. Have people died while in the direct care of Scientologists?
9. Does the cost of auditing and books etc. become so prohibitive that
people go into debt trying to take all the courses needed to move up the
bridge?
10. Does Scientology demand absolute obedience to "Source" (the late
L.Ron Hubbard)?
11. Do Scientologists attending pickets loudly proclaim "what are your
crimes"?
12. Do Scientologists threaten critics' families and friends and revenge
picket their private dwellings?
13. Do scientologists use the law to harass and bankrupt its critics?
14. Do Scientologists publicize confidential credit reports in an
attempt to smear people?
15. Do you think that speaking out against the illegal and dangerous
practices of a Church should be our right as citizens?
16. Do Scientologists lie?
Please answer these questions in brief. No screaming "what are your
crimes", no shouting Bigot,Bigot (you do sound like a frog when you do
that you know), no irresponsible threats against me or other critics -
just straightforward answers.
Thank you
Y
Devoid
<dors...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8ri9d3$a7t$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Lord, you paint in broad strokes.
differences and similarities, Dan
what was ron's definition of sanity again?
nice Philisophical positioning thought.
Devoid
Raptavio
Why make a post intended for the reasonable, when you say this forum is
made up of nothing more than the insane?
For that matter, you make up part of this forum.
Dorsai, the words 'nothing more' appear a lot in your posts. And they
almost invariably appear in places that can turn truthful or at least
defensible statements into complete falsehoods. Are you sure you don't
have an M/U on "nothing more?"
Best,
Rap
--
"It must be exciting to think that way, but a drag to have to deal with
the clinical diagnosis."
Raptavio
deom...@aol.comgetlost (DeoMorto) wrote:
> >
> >This post is for the reasonable men and women. For we can agree to
> >disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
when
> >we are.
>
>
> have you ever made a post where you admitted that the CofS had done
anything
> wrong?
>
> Your answer, I fear, supports your contention that only the truly
insane can
> never admit to a mistake.
In the interests of honesty, I have seen Dorsai666 admit to being
wrong. I have also seen him admit the CofS has done something wrong,
but only in the abstract.
Captain Nerd
Hash: SHA1
In article <8ri9d3$a7t$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, dors...@my-deja.com wrote:
> When I look over the names and "handles" of people antipathetic to
> Scientology in this forum, it is an invitation to hate. It is a small
> list of people, made up of even smaller minds and even narrower
> spiritual enlightenment.
What makes you feel hate?
> The list of locals such as Android, Kaeli, Gregg, Wulfen, Mike Argue
> and some inconstant supporters make up a minority of people ACTUALLY
> in battle or war with my church. Their reasons are spurious and the
> intent is to invite hatred. That is and are the actions of bigots.
How do you know their reasons are spurious? How do you know they
intend to invite you to hatred?
> No matter what pretext is used, no matter what derrogatory or
> inflammatory language or "information" is used - it is an invitation to
> hate. Nothing more.
Who is inviting you to hate? Why do you think they are inviting
you to hate?
> While it can be hoped that these individuals could and would turn over
> a "new leaf" so to speak and just get on with their lives and do
> something constructive with it, this does not appear to be their intent
> nor their inclination. Their inclination is to foment hate and to
> villify any decent, reasoning group - which just so happens to disagree
> with their vile behavior both in this forum and outside it.
Do you feel that your hatred is shared by your group? Can your group
hate this way and still be "decent [and] reasoning?"
> Their personal lives are filled with mistakes, tragedies, medical drug
> use to "temper" this same unreasonableness they not only conduct in
> this forum - but their own lives.
Everyone makes mistakes. Everyone suffers tragedies. To deny that
is to deny one's humanity. To claim that someone making mistakes or
suffering tragedies somehow "conducts their lives unreasonably" is
to display callous arrogance.
> Why else would one "contribute" to
> such a morass of hate inspired and bigoted views. Not a ONE of them
> have any interest of participation or contributing for the greater good
> of others, and so they fight us.
This is an incredible lie. You are not the sole arbiters of
"contributing
to the greater good of others." Your actions towards people who reveal
the abuse of people and the law that you perpetrate belie your "greater
good" words.
> While there is the invitation to hate them because of their destructive
> and annoying behavior, I do not.
This too is a lie. If you didn't hate critics, you wouldn't be calling
us "bigots" and "unreasonable". If you didn't hate us, you would listen
to your own "parishioners" who try to tell you what is wrong with your
"church."
> If they were reasonable men & women,
> we could agree to disagree and get on with what each of us DOES believe
> in. This is not the case. These are not reasonable men and women,
> despite their protestaions to the contrary. They are bigots. Pure and
> simple.
This is hate speech. You are not allowed to even consider that someone
who disagrees with you may have valid reasons for doing so. Your
thinking is restricted to labelling and hating.
> While they continue to fight us, we will continue to fight for our
> rights...and theirs too. Not in this forum so much as in the halls of
> government and seeking fair play and justice to pursue our life, our
> liberty and our happiness - as we see fit.
You do not have the right to harrass, intimidate, threaten, abuse,
attack, use violence against, or kill anyone who disagrees with you,
or who points out your wrongdoing.
> They (bigots) are entitled
> to these same rights and unfortunately, do nothing to earn them.
Rights are inherent in individuals, they aren't earned.
> This post is for the reasonable men and women. For we can agree to
> disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong - when
> we are. The same cannot be said for the insane. THAT is what this
> forum is made up of...nothing more.
You are telling the "reasonable" people that do disagree with you
is "insane." To point out the crimes that your "church" has committed
is "unreasonable." And since you refuse to acknowledge when someone
tells you that you've broken laws and harmed people, you never have
admitted you are wrong.
And you've never thought about who you trust, and why you do so.
Cap.
>
> Dorsai666
>
>
>
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.2
iQA/AwUBOdzInrztfgpKlX7qEQJOxwCgtIVp0AsTQRwnZmeeLBY2hOVM/2UAoPSZ
Dwo+Oo4kgWqovoYyn6L3KCzf
=zbWC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Operation: Nerdwatch - http://www.nerdwatch.com
Captain Nerd can be reached at: cpt...@nerdwatch.com
"By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes."
dors...@my-deja.com
yduzit...@sympatico.ca wrote:
> Dorsai: a Few Questions:
Dear Yduz,
Answer this question and it's just one.
Do you still beat your wife?
Dorsai666
Just about as loaded as your nonsense, isn't it? From your point of
view, we're ALL bad, so why even bother mr. yduzitmatter
dors...@my-deja.com
Chris Leithiser <clei...@bc.cc.ca.us> wrote:
> dors...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> > When I look over the names and "handles" of people antipathetic to
> > Scientology in this forum, it is an invitation to hate. It is a
small
> > list of people, made up of even smaller minds and even narrower
> > spiritual enlightenment.
> >
> > and some inconstant supporters make up a minority of people ACTUALLY
> > in battle or war with my church. Their reasons are spurious and the
> > intent is to invite hatred. That is and are the actions of bigots.
> >
> > inflammatory language or "information" is used - it is an
invitation to
> > hate. Nothing more.
> >
over
> > a "new leaf" so to speak and just get on with their lives and do
> > something constructive with it, this does not appear to be their
intent
> > nor their inclination. Their inclination is to foment hate and to
> > villify any decent, reasoning group - which just so happens to
disagree
> > with their vile behavior both in this forum and outside it.
> >
drug
> > use to "temper" this same unreasonableness they not only conduct in
to
> > such a morass of hate inspired and bigoted views. Not a ONE of them
> > have any interest of participation or contributing for the greater
good
> > of others, and so they fight us.
> >
destructive
women,
> > we could agree to disagree and get on with what each of us DOES
believe
> > in. This is not the case. These are not reasonable men and women,
> > despite their protestaions to the contrary. They are bigots. Pure
and
> > simple.
> >
> > rights...and theirs too. Not in this forum so much as in the halls
of
> > government and seeking fair play and justice to pursue our life, our
entitled
> > to these same rights and unfortunately, do nothing to earn them.
> >
> > disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
when
> > we are. The same cannot be said for the insane. THAT is what this
> > forum is made up of...nothing more.
> >
Unlike you, I can afford to change my point of view. Even write from
that point of view as well. It's covered in a policy letter, but you'd
never know and more than likely...never will.
I'm happy that you LIKED what I (UNDERLINED) wrote.
If you liked that, you might like Lunatic fringe and bigots which was
again "another viewpoint" I wrote from.
Again, I'm the one who's free. You only have one viewpoint to occupy
and that's getting smaller every day.
Dorsai666
mad_b...@my-deja.com
>
You forgot one question...
What HCOPL was dorsai666 applying when he yelled in Gregg's ear.
Mad Kow (hint: there isn't an HCOPL for applying tone 40 directly onto
the eardrum)
dors...@my-deja.com
Mr. Nerd,
You're wrong. Rights are fought for and hard won. Many wars can
testify to this fact. They are too easily taken away by actions such
as your own, by having to "curb" the criminal activities in society.
Thus, you too lose those rights by these actions and inaction to help
others in theirs. Only the insane would destroy their own freedom(s).
There are laws that protect the rights of people and if there's any
wrong-doing, those same officials will enforce it. They don't need
bigoted fools to tell them their "jobs".
I trust most people right up to the point where I'm betrayed with a
stab in the back. I can afford to be that way as I don't live in fear
and no harm can truly come to me personally. Those rights I fight for
are not for me - they're for you.
Think what you will, I'm an enemy to bigotry...not to you.
Dorsai666
dors...@my-deja.com
Raptavio <lordmagnu...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <8ri9d3$a7t$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> dors...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > When I look over the names and "handles" of people antipathetic to
> > Scientology in this forum, it is an invitation to hate. It is a
small
> > list of people, made up of even smaller minds and even narrower
> > spiritual enlightenment.
> >
> > and some inconstant supporters make up a minority of people ACTUALLY
> > in battle or war with my church. Their reasons are spurious and the
> > intent is to invite hatred. That is and are the actions of bigots.
> >
> > inflammatory language or "information" is used - it is an invitation
> to
> > hate. Nothing more.
> >
over
> > a "new leaf" so to speak and just get on with their lives and do
> > something constructive with it, this does not appear to be their
> intent
> > nor their inclination. Their inclination is to foment hate and to
> > villify any decent, reasoning group - which just so happens to
> disagree
> > with their vile behavior both in this forum and outside it.
> >
drug
> > use to "temper" this same unreasonableness they not only conduct in
to
> > such a morass of hate inspired and bigoted views. Not a ONE of them
> > have any interest of participation or contributing for the greater
> good
> > of others, and so they fight us.
> >
> destructive
women,
> > we could agree to disagree and get on with what each of us DOES
> believe
> > in. This is not the case. These are not reasonable men and women,
> > despite their protestaions to the contrary. They are bigots. Pure
> and
> > simple.
> >
> > rights...and theirs too. Not in this forum so much as in the halls
of
> > government and seeking fair play and justice to pursue our life, our
entitled
> > to these same rights and unfortunately, do nothing to earn them.
> >
> > disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
> when
> > we are. The same cannot be said for the insane. THAT is what this
> > forum is made up of...nothing more.
> >
>
> Why make a post intended for the reasonable, when you say this forum
is
> made up of nothing more than the insane?
>
> For that matter, you make up part of this forum.
Not for the hard core ARS...for those who lurk and think that there's
a "legitimacy" to being a bigot. To that extent I post, not for the
edification of suppressives and PTSes (anti-socials)but for
someone "looking".
>
> Dorsai, the words 'nothing more' appear a lot in your posts. And they
> almost invariably appear in places that can turn truthful or at least
> defensible statements into complete falsehoods. Are you sure you don't
> have an M/U on "nothing more?"
As you're the one with the question, perhaps you have the MU.
Even less.
Dorsai666
>
> Best,
>
> Rap
>
> --
> "It must be exciting to think that way, but a drag to have to deal
with
> the clinical diagnosis."
>
dors...@my-deja.com
tinmi...@hotmail.com (mimus) wrote:
> dors...@my-deja.com posted:
Clear your MisU. There is more than one defintion, though it's
doubtful if you intended to "understand". It goes along with the self
importance of "the not quite bright", remember?
Dorsai666
>
> --
> tinmi...@hotmail.com
dors...@my-deja.com
> >disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
when
> >we are.
>
>
> have you ever made a post where you admitted that the CofS had done
anything
> wrong?
>
> Your answer, I fear, supports your contention that only the truly
insane can
> never admit to a mistake.
ONLY the social personality tries to correct their mistakes. The
morally reprehensible and anti-social want to remain ignorant and thus
cannot "see".
Did that answer your question?
Dorsai666
>
> Semper ubi sub ubi
dors...@my-deja.com
"Devoid" <Dev...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> <dors...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8ri9d3
$a7t$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
when
> > forum is made up of...nothing more.
> >
>
> differences and similarities, Dan
>
> what was ron's definition of sanity again?
>
> nice Philisophical positioning thought.
>
> Devoid
You forgot identities.
Dorsai666
Phineas Fogg
To loath fraud, deciet, lies, persecution, etc., perpretated by the church is not
objectionable, by any reasonable standard.
Your church is most definitely not fighting for our rights, for their goal is to
"clear the planet", and if they ever achieve it, which is highly unlikely, you
can bet your rootie patootie the Bill Of Rights will be preplaced by that anemic
legal concept called the "comm ev". The very idea of the comm ev which can
be brought to bare in a manner characteristic of a kangaroo court whose arbiters
consist of small-minded men with hidden agendas operating in the vacuum of
the absence of the right to due process, and other legal doctrines
which have evolved over centuries, is a scary one, to say the least.
No, it is far from perfect, and no legal system can be perfect, but it is far
better than what Scientology will offer the world.
No, I'm afraid 'tis better to keep Hubbard in the Cupboard.
You have the right to live your life as you see fit, but know that your church engages
in behaviour which is condemnable, and we aren't the only ones who understand
this. And we most definitely are not misinformed, which have the documents to prove it,
you remain ignorant of the fact.
Phineas Fogg
Chris Leithiser
> Unlike you, I can afford to change my point of view. Even write from
> that point of view as well. It's covered in a policy letter, but you'd
> never know and more than likely...never will.
Y'know, Dan, this is the first time you've responded to something I
wrote. Must have hit a button or something. So who _did_ ghost-write
it for you?
I change my point of view daily. Can write from any POV, too. And I
don't need the demented scribblings of a half-talented sci-fi hack to
tell me how to do it. "Policy letter."
> I'm happy that you LIKED what I (UNDERLINED) wrote.
You typed it, maybe. You merely parroted what someone else thought you
should say--since you tend to write yourself into corners when you
originate. Like your insane rantings about your kids. Why did you drag
your kids into your cult's battle?
> If you liked that, you might like Lunatic fringe and bigots which was
> again "another viewpoint" I wrote from.
No, I don't think I'd like being a $cientologist. Too many lunatics
amongst the good folk. And too many like you--who just don't make sense
unless someone tells them what to write.
> Again, I'm the one who's free. You only have one viewpoint to occupy
> and that's getting smaller every day.
"I'm the one who's free," he wrote, from within his cage of fear.
Your fear has caused you to involve your own children in your cult's
lunatic battle against freedom.
How free is that, Dan? How free is it when you fear the very _idea_ of
freedom?
Chris Leithiser
>
> ONLY the social personality tries to correct their mistakes. The
> morally reprehensible and anti-social want to remain ignorant and thus
> cannot "see".
>
> Did that answer your question?
>
> Dorsai666
Whom are you quoting? Whose program are you running? Whose life are
you living?
Gerry Armstrong
>When I look over the names and "handles" of people antipathetic to
>Scientology in this forum, it is an invitation to hate.
Many things to $cientologists, especially $cientologists with
functions like yours, are invitations to hate. $cientology is as you
know a hate group.
> It is a small
>list of people, made up of even smaller minds and even narrower
>spiritual enlightenment.
The only enlightened $cientologists are born-again wogs (R).
>
>The list of locals such as Android, Kaeli, Gregg, Wulfen, Mike Argue
>and some inconstant supporters make up a minority of people ACTUALLY
>in battle or war with my church.
Heh, Dan, every wog (R) is at war with your cult. Many wogs (R) aren't
even aware that you $cientologists have initiated your insane War On
Wogs (WOW!) (R), and fighting the war has fallen to a few good wogs
(R). But that is changing because wogs (R) are waking all around the
world. Android, Kaeli, Gregg, Wulfen and Mike Argue are the aware wogs
(R), the enlightened ones, the ones who have been fighting the insane
war Hubbard postulated. Soon these fighters will be relieved by 15
wogs (R) each. You are surrounded. All $cientologists are surrounded.
> Their reasons are spurious and the
>intent is to invite hatred. That is and are the actions of bigots.
$cientology is the religion of bigotry.
>
>No matter what pretext is used, no matter what derrogatory or
>inflammatory language or "information" is used - it is an invitation to
>hate. Nothing more.
Yes, right out of the mind of L. Ron Hubbard. Have you read his
"Admissions," Dan?
http://holysmoke.org/ga/admissions.pdf
Don't you get that a man who would postulate that "men are my slaves"
is a hater?
>
>While it can be hoped that these individuals could and would turn over
>a "new leaf" so to speak and just get on with their lives and do
>something constructive with it, this does not appear to be their intent
>nor their inclination.
They're you're wrong. Your cult wants to dispose of wogs (R) you don't
like quietly and without sorrow. These individual wogs (R) stand in
your way. The prevention of the holocaust Hubbard urged is very
constructive. You should thank these folks from preventing you from
doing more evil than you've already done.
I would urge you to apologize to all of them. And then join them in
their opposition to $cientology's insane War On Wogs (WOW!) (R).
> Their inclination is to foment hate and to
>villify any decent, reasoning group -
Absolutely untrue. Now you know that $cientology is not a decent
reasoning group. It cannot be vilified. That's the significance of the
$cientology v. Time decision.
>which just so happens to disagree
>with their vile behavior both in this forum and outside it.
Of course $cientology disagrees. $cientology is a criminal
organization with the hidden ev purp of disposing of undesirables
quietly and without sorrow.
Again, Dan, just apologize to the Toronto Contingent, and then go
picket with them against your criminal cult. Become a born-again wogs
(R) today.
>
>Their personal lives are filled with mistakes, tragedies, medical drug
>use to "temper" this same unreasonableness they not only conduct in
>this forum - but their own lives.
Oh, bullshit.
> Why else would one "contribute" to
>such a morass of hate inspired and bigoted views. Not a ONE of them
>have any interest of participation or contributing for the greater good
>of others, and so they fight us.
Their fighting *is* for the good of others. They are stopping death's
dark curtain that $cientology would drop on humanity. You are just
forwarding $cientology's hidden ev purp.
>
>While there is the invitation to hate them because of their destructive
>and annoying behavior, I do not.
Sure you do. Every $cientologist hates them. If you stopped hating
them you'd be a wog (R).
> If they were reasonable men & women,
>we could agree to disagree and get on with what each of us DOES believe
>in.
What liars $cientologist are. You actually despise reasonable men and
women. Being reasonable in $cientology is cause for punishment. Your
philosophy is insane.
> This is not the case. These are not reasonable men and women,
>despite their protestaions to the contrary. They are bigots. Pure and
>simple.
Oh sure, people who stand up and prevent $cientology's postulated
quiet, sorrowless disposal of society's "undesirables," are bigots.
What a laugh. They're heroes.
If you weren't such a coward, fighting your dirty covert War On Wogs
(WOW!) (R), you could be a hero too.
>
>While they continue to fight us, we will continue to fight for our
>rights
Your right to dispose of wogs (R) you deem undesirable quietly and
without sorrow. You have no such right. Your criminal cult is stopped
in its tracks. You are surrounded. You have no way out but to
apologize.
>...and theirs too. Not in this forum so much as in the halls of
>government and seeking fair play and justice to pursue our life, our
>liberty and our happiness - as we see fit.
You think you will be as Hubbard promises happy and uptone once you
dispose of all the wog (R) undesirables quietly and without sorrow,
but you will never be. Even if you achieved your evil purpose, and
successfully disposed of all the people you designate "undesirable,"
you would not be happy, because you would all kills yourselves. But
you will never be allowed to achieve your evil purpose. Wogs (R) upon
wogs (R) upon wogs (R), as far as the eye can see, in every country of
the world, billions upon billions of wogs (R) stand in your way.
Now, just a handful of brave wogs (R) stop you and your criminal cult
in your mad evil plan. When all the sleeping wogs (R) wake you will
have no way out. Now is the time to apologize.
> They (bigots) are entitled
>to these same rights and unfortunately, do nothing to earn them.
Wogs (R) have earned you every right you possess today, clam boy. Say
thanks and apologize while you still can.
>
>This post is for the reasonable men and women. For we can agree to
>disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong - when
>we are.
Well then let's start with what happened. Do you acknowldge that you
are the Dan who assaulted me October 16, 1999 in front of the Toronto
org?
> The same cannot be said for the insane. THAT is what this
>forum is made up of...nothing more.
I would be careful with those postulates, Dan. You are surrounded and
in no position to be calling wogs (R) names.
(c) Gerry Armstrong
Devoid
<dors...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8rioms$o7d$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <Rk3D5.295275$Gh.84...@news20.bellglobal.com>,
> "Devoid" <Dev...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> >
> small
> > > list of people, made up of even smaller minds and even narrower
> > > spiritual enlightenment.
> > >
> > > and some inconstant supporters make up a minority of people ACTUALLY
> > > intent is to invite hatred. That is and are the actions of bigots.
> > >
> > > inflammatory language or "information" is used - it is an
> invitation to
> > > hate. Nothing more.
> > >
> over
> > > a "new leaf" so to speak and just get on with their lives and do
> > > something constructive with it, this does not appear to be their
> intent
> > > villify any decent, reasoning group - which just so happens to
> disagree
> > > with their vile behavior both in this forum and outside it.
> > >
> drug
> > > use to "temper" this same unreasonableness they not only conduct in
> to
> > > such a morass of hate inspired and bigoted views. Not a ONE of them
> > > have any interest of participation or contributing for the greater
> good
> > > of others, and so they fight us.
> > >
> destructive
> women,
> > > we could agree to disagree and get on with what each of us DOES
> believe
> > > despite their protestaions to the contrary. They are bigots. Pure
> and
> > > simple.
> > >
> of
> > > government and seeking fair play and justice to pursue our life, our
> entitled
> > > to these same rights and unfortunately, do nothing to earn them.
> > >
> > > disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
> when
> > > forum is made up of...nothing more.
> > >
> >
> > differences and similarities, Dan
> >
> > what was ron's definition of sanity again?
> >
> > nice Philisophical positioning thought.
> >
> > Devoid
>
>
>
> You forgot identities.
>
>
>
Tech dic. Def. 6
Devoid
mimus
>In article <39dcc24d...@news.zoomnet.net>,
> tinmi...@hotmail.com (mimus) wrote:
>> dors...@my-deja.com posted:
>>
>> Reasonableness is "out-ethics", innit?
>
>Clear your MisU. There is more than one defintion, though it's
>doubtful if you intended to "understand". It goes along with the self
>importance of "the not quite bright", remember?
You mean there's a Hubbard policy enjoining peace with critics of
Scientology?
Captain Nerd
Hash: SHA1
You had better be clear about what you claim I'm doing. If you are
claiming that I am a criminal, you had better be prepared to show
proof.
Rights are inherent to the individual. Keeping the rights may require
fighting, but that doesn't mean the rights are "earned," merely
"preserved."
> Thus, you too lose those rights by these actions and inaction to help
> others in theirs. Only the insane would destroy their own freedom(s).
You have surrendered your soul and mind to your leaders in the "church"
of scientology. You say what they want you to say, feel what they tell
you to feel, and think what they tell you to think. They forbid you
from reading, seeing, thinking, feeling, anything that would inform
you of your loss of self. You have surrendered your freedom, to a group
that cares far less about you than they care about their own power and
wealth.
> There are laws that protect the rights of people and if there's any
> wrong-doing, those same officials will enforce it. They don't need
> bigoted fools to tell them their "jobs".
If you intend to claim that I am breaking the law, any law, you
had better be prepared to provide proof of that.
> I trust most people right up to the point where I'm betrayed with a
> stab in the back. I can afford to be that way as I don't live in fear
> and no harm can truly come to me personally. Those rights I fight for
> are not for me - they're for you.
I have the power to fight for my own rights. I also have the freedom
to determine for myself how to live my life. I don't follow orders,
I don't depend on "policy letters" or "org management" to determine
where and how I live. No one can take my freedom away, and I most
assuredly won't pay people to take it from me.
> Think what you will, I'm an enemy to bigotry...not to you.
I will think what I will, and I will read what I will. I read what
you write here, and I judge you based on that. I understand that
you have claimed critics are your "enemies." I am a critic of your
"church's" abuses of people and the law, therefore in your eyes I
am an enemy, even though I don't consider myself such.
I have been trying to reach you, to get through your blinders. You
are being misled, you are being taken, you have given your trust to
people who don't care about you. I don't want to see someone giving
up their freedom that way, but I don't want to see you and your fellow
"parishioners" continue to harm those that disagree with you. You
must realize that by surrendering your freedom to your leaders, you
cannot surrender your responsibility for their actions, or for what
they order you to do.
Understand? You have to ask yourself, who do you trust, and why?
Cap.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.2
iQA/AwUBOdzzsbztfgpKlX7qEQIPCwCgw+0D5mt/xIgms7KORtpauPRy5DoAoJJH
maTan8bXzZAuVb/raQuPThdP
=uBzi
yduzitmatter
Pleased be advised that your libellous attacks against me are
worthless. You are
in a fog and a froth over nothing at all. NO ONE is going near your
family -unlike your so-called church which has no ethics what-so-ever-
they picket Gregg's home and have even tried to DA him through his
wife's job. This is unethical behaviour.
Y
Chris Leithiser
You know, that's why $cientologists posting here have such a low opinion
of critics.
Dan, and his "ilk," assumes we're just like he is.
ptsc
>This post is for the reasonable men and women.
[To laugh at]
>For we can agree to
>disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong - when
>we are.
>The same cannot be said for the insane. THAT is what this
>forum is made up of...nothing more.
Yes, that's true, you are indeed insane. You can't admit you are wrong.
When you LIED and said that Gregg was a "criminal" and that you had "proof."
He isn't and he didn't, and you LIED, and since you're INSANE you can't admit
it.
When you said Bob Minton was a criminal and had been INDICTED
you LIED and you DIDN'T post an INDICTMENT. Because you didn't have it, because
there isn't one.
And since you're "insane" you can't admit it, even though you're wrong.
ptsc
Arnie Lerma
says...
>
>[snip evidence of a massive group deception induced for profit delusion]
>> The same cannot be said for the insane. THAT is what this
>> forum is made up of...nothing more.
>>
>> Dorsai666
>
>
>
>To loath fraud, deciet, lies, persecution, etc., perpretated by the church is
>not
>objectionable, by any reasonable standard.
>
Yes, I hate fraud, especially those who profit from lies, of those, especially
those who enslave other with lies, of those, those who who enslave
others with promises of TOTAL FREEDOM [tm] Religious Technology Center
Incorporated.
If there was just one OT in Scientology, they would not need lies, deception,
intimidations, dead cats, followed kids, PI's, scumbag lawyers, sec checks, and
induced suicide - all to silence voices of those who can see through their lies
Most of all I hate slavery and slavers.
Arnie Lerma
Ex-Scientology Slave
NEW index page for 82cwcommission files
see summary of lies
http://www.lermanet.com/82cwcommission/index.html
>Your church is most definitely not fighting for our rights, for their goal is
>to
>"clear the planet", and if they ever achieve it, which is highly unlikely,
>you
>can bet your rootie patootie the Bill Of Rights will be preplaced by that anemic
>legal concept called the "comm ev". The very idea of the comm ev which can
>be brought to bare in a manner characteristic of a kangaroo court whose
>arbiters
>consist of small-minded men with hidden agendas operating in the vacuum of
>the absence of the right to due process, and other legal doctrines
>which have evolved over centuries, is a scary one, to say the least.
>
>
>No, it is far from perfect, and no legal system can be perfect, but it is
>far
>better than what Scientology will offer the world.
>
>
>No, I'm afraid 'tis better to keep Hubbard in the Cupboard.
>
>
>You have the right to live your life as you see fit, but know that your church
>engages
>in behaviour which is condemnable, and we aren't the only ones who
>understand
>this. And we most definitely are not misinformed, which have the documents to
>prove it,
>you remain ignorant of the fact.
>
>
>Phineas Fogg
>
>
I'd prefer to die speaking my mind than live fearing to speak.
The only thing that always works in scientology are its lawyers
Slave chains forged of lies are stronger than the finest steel
http://www.lermanet.com - mentioned 4 January 2000 in
The Washington Post's - 'Reliable Source' column re "Scientologist with no HEAD"
Brent Stone
>In article <39DCC0DC...@sympatico.ca>,
> yduzit...@sympatico.ca wrote:
>> Dorsai: a Few Questions:
>
>Dear Yduz,
>
>Answer this question and it's just one.
>
>Do you still beat your wife?
Here. I'll answer it. I never did beat my wife.
Now, do you want to answer the questions below?
Hint: You can always say "it never happened" if it's the truth.
Hint 2: None of the questions below are phrased in the nature
that you just phrased your question.
>Dorsai666
>
>Just about as loaded as your nonsense, isn't it? From your point of
>view, we're ALL bad, so why even bother mr. yduzitmatter
No, not the questions below are not loaded. They are asking for
facts about your organization, its policies and actions. None of
them assume any answer, although by your answer here, we can see
that you know of the abuses of your "church" referred to in the
questions, and will not answer because of your knowledge.
You can't answer the questions truthfully because the answers would
reflect badly on you and your "church". By refusing to answer, you
have answered. I've filled in the answer you have given for you.
If you would like to change your answers to any of the questions,
feel free to say so. In doing so, please keep your answers related
to the questions. There is no need to shout "bigot" or attack the
character of the questioner, just discuss the topic of the question.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> 1. Does Scientology cause people to disconnect from their families?
Dan can't answer "no" to this, because he knows the answer is "yes", and
it would reflect badly on what he is defending to admit it.
>> 2. Does Scientology teach that your IQ will improve and that you will
>> gain control over MEST?
Dan can't answer "no" to this, because he knows the answer is "yes", and
it would reflect badly on what he is defending to admit it.
>> 3. Does Scientology use practices that are potentially dangerous to
>> people's health and well being?
Dan can't answer "no" to this, because he knows the answer is "yes", and
it would reflect badly on what he is defending to admit it.
>> 4. Does Scientology teach that anyone who dares criticize it is a
>> criminal?
Dan can't answer "no" to this, because he knows the answer is "yes", and
it would reflect badly on what he is defending to admit it.
>> 5. Has the church, and/or individual members ever been convicted of
>> crimes against critics?
Dan can't answer "no" to this, because he knows the answer is "yes", and
it would reflect badly on what he is defending to admit it.
>> 6. Has Scientology ever been caught with its hands in Government
>files?
Dan can't answer "no" to this, because he knows the answer is "yes", and
it would reflect badly on what he is defending to admit it.
>> 7. Does the COS hire PI's to stalk, harass, and wreak havoc in
>peoples'
>> lives - just because they criticize it?
Dan can't answer "no" to this, because he knows the answer is "yes", and
it would reflect badly on what he is defending to admit it.
>> 8. Have people died while in the direct care of Scientologists?
Dan can't answer "no" to this, because he knows the answer is "yes", and
it would reflect badly on what he is defending to admit it.
>> 9. Does the cost of auditing and books etc. become so prohibitive that
>> people go into debt trying to take all the courses needed to move up
>the
>> bridge?
Dan can't answer "no" to this, because he knows the answer is "yes", and
it would reflect badly on what he is defending to admit it.
>> 10. Does Scientology demand absolute obedience to "Source" (the late
>> L.Ron Hubbard)?
Dan can't answer "no" to this, because he knows the answer is "yes", and
it would reflect badly on what he is defending to admit it.
>> 11. Do Scientologists attending pickets loudly proclaim "what are
>your
>> crimes"?
Dan can't answer "no" to this, because he knows the answer is "yes", and
it would reflect badly on what he is defending to admit it.
>> 12. Do Scientologists threaten critics' families and friends and
>revenge
>> picket their private dwellings?
Dan can't answer "no" to this, because he knows the answer is "yes", and
it would reflect badly on what he is defending to admit it.
>> 13. Do scientologists use the law to harass and bankrupt its critics?
Dan can't answer "no" to this, because he knows the answer is "yes", and
it would reflect badly on what he is defending to admit it.
>> 14. Do Scientologists publicize confidential credit reports in an
>> attempt to smear people?
Dan can't answer "no" to this, because he knows the answer is "yes", and
it would reflect badly on what he is defending to admit it.
>> 15. Do you think that speaking out against the illegal and dangerous
>> practices of a Church should be our right as citizens?
Dan can't answer "yes" to this, because he knows the answer is "no", and
it would reflect badly on him to admit it.
>> 16. Do Scientologists lie?
Dan can't answer "no" to this, because he knows the answer is "yes", and
it would reflect badly on him to admit it.
>> Please answer these questions in brief. No screaming "what are your
>> crimes", no shouting Bigot,Bigot (you do sound like a frog when you do
>> that you know), no irresponsible threats against me or other critics -
>> just straightforward answers.
>> Thank you
>> Y
>>
>>
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
- Brent
Byll23
>When I look over the names and "handles" of people antipathetic to
>Scientology in this forum, it is an invitation to hate. It is a small
>list of people, made up of even smaller minds and even narrower
>spiritual enlightenment.
>
"I can't prove I'm telling the truth, so I'll just call them names and hope
no-one notices!"
>The list of locals such as Android, Kaeli, Gregg, Wulfen, Mike Argue
>and some inconstant supporters make up a minority of people ACTUALLY
>in battle or war with my church. Their reasons are spurious and the
>intent is to invite hatred. That is and are the actions of bigots.
>
"If anyone notices and calls me on it, I'll just keep up the name calling
and add that person to the list!"
>No matter what pretext is used, no matter what derrogatory or
>inflammatory language or "information" is used - it is an invitation to
>hate. Nothing more.
>
"None of them has ever threatened violence, but I'll just pretend they have."
>While it can be hoped that these individuals could and would turn over
>a "new leaf" so to speak and just get on with their lives and do
>something constructive with it, this does not appear to be their intent
>nor their inclination. Their inclination is to foment hate and to
>villify any decent, reasoning group - which just so happens to disagree
>with their vile behavior both in this forum and outside it.
>
"They're uneasonable. Anyone who wants an open, honest dialog is
unreasonable."
>Their personal lives are filled with mistakes, tragedies, medical drug
>use to "temper" this same unreasonableness they not only conduct in
>this forum - but their own lives. Why else would one "contribute" to
>such a morass of hate inspired and bigoted views. Not a ONE of them
>have any interest of participation or contributing for the greater good
>of others, and so they fight us.
>
"They're EEEEEEEEEEEEVIL!"
>While there is the invitation to hate them because of their destructive
>and annoying behavior, I do not. If they were reasonable men & women,
>we could agree to disagree and get on with what each of us DOES believe
>in. This is not the case. These are not reasonable men and women,
>despite their protestaions to the contrary. They are bigots. Pure and
>simple.
>
"I'll just keep repeating the same stuff over and over, hoping repetition
makes up for lack of proof."
>While they continue to fight us, we will continue to fight for our
>rights...and theirs too. Not in this forum so much as in the halls of
>government and seeking fair play and justice to pursue our life, our
>liberty and our happiness - as we see fit. They (bigots) are entitled
>to these same rights and unfortunately, do nothing to earn them.
>
"But once we take over the government, that's gonna change..."
>This post is for the reasonable men and women. For we can agree to
>disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong - when
>we are. The same cannot be said for the insane. THAT is what this
>forum is made up of...nothing more.
>
"If you're reading ths, you're crazy!"
Gregg
>When I look over the names and "handles" of people antipathetic to
>Scientology in this forum, it is an invitation to hate. It is a small
>list of people, made up of even smaller minds and even narrower
>spiritual enlightenment.
>
>The list of locals such as Android, Kaeli, Gregg, Wulfen, Mike Argue
>and some inconstant supporters make up a minority of people ACTUALLY
>in battle or war with my church. Their reasons are spurious and the
>intent is to invite hatred. That is and are the actions of bigots.
>
>No matter what pretext is used, no matter what derrogatory or
>inflammatory language or "information" is used - it is an invitation to
>hate. Nothing more.
>
>While it can be hoped that these individuals could and would turn over
>a "new leaf" so to speak and just get on with their lives and do
>something constructive with it, this does not appear to be their intent
>nor their inclination. Their inclination is to foment hate and to
>villify any decent, reasoning group - which just so happens to disagree
>with their vile behavior both in this forum and outside it.
>
>Their personal lives are filled with mistakes, tragedies, medical drug
>use to "temper" this same unreasonableness they not only conduct in
>this forum - but their own lives. Why else would one "contribute" to
>such a morass of hate inspired and bigoted views. Not a ONE of them
>have any interest of participation or contributing for the greater good
>of others, and so they fight us.
>
>While there is the invitation to hate them because of their destructive
>and annoying behavior, I do not. If they were reasonable men & women,
>we could agree to disagree and get on with what each of us DOES believe
>in. This is not the case. These are not reasonable men and women,
>despite their protestaions to the contrary. They are bigots. Pure and
>simple.
>
>While they continue to fight us, we will continue to fight for our
>rights...and theirs too. Not in this forum so much as in the halls of
>government and seeking fair play and justice to pursue our life, our
>liberty and our happiness - as we see fit. They (bigots) are entitled
>to these same rights and unfortunately, do nothing to earn them.
>
>This post is for the reasonable men and women. For we can agree to
>disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong - when
>we are. The same cannot be said for the insane. THAT is what this
>forum is made up of...nothing more.
>
>Dorsai666
>aka Dan Bryenton
>
Hmm. If everyone who posts here is insane, then what about
you?
Didn't I catch you on tape laughing when a passerby voice the
old classic;
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and
over again and expecting a different result"?
I think that applies to you more than to others here 'Daffy'
Dan Bryenton.
What ever is hateful about informing the public of the past
and current criminal activities and convictions of Scientology?
What ever is hateful about demanding Scientology be up front
about its content so consumers can make an informed commitment instead
of being victimized by a 'bait and switch' scam?
What ever is hateful about demanding Scientology follow the
same consumer laws that apply to any other corporation *selling a
product*?
What is hateful or untruthful about the following statements?
Scientology Management does not always tell truth;
Scientology Management has condoned and often conducted illegal,
unethical and immoral activities;
Some Scientology Practices are dangerous to participants health,
either physical or mental or both;
Scientology Management and L.R. Hubbard lied about Hubbards life,
history and accomplishments;
Despite the pseudo-scientific claims of Hubbard no Scientology or
Dianetic process has *ever* been clinically *proven* to work as
claimed.
I have been circulating the above, in one form or another for
three years.
Were the above not true, then they would be defamations of
Corporate Scientology and we both know Co$ has the money and the
lawyers to force me to retract or cease to utter or print them.
But the above *are* true Dan Bryenton.
And the first four are enforced by *current* Co$ policies.
Tell me Dan Bryenton, why is it that Scientology and yourself
continuously complain of "hate' crimes being committed against your
criminal corporation by myself, yet the Hate Crimes Unit and other
members of the Toronto Police force and even higher levels of
government have told you ever again: Criticism is protected by the
Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
I expect you *do* hate what I have to say and by Hubbard
policy you hate me.
However *I* do not hate you. I dislike you, yes. I dislike you
personally for what you do, say, condone and support.
This has never been about 'belief sets' but about Hubbards'
criminal policies and doctrines which condone and mandate, even demand
the abuse of individuals within and without Scientology and similarly
the abuse of and disregard for democratic law.
You keep calling me a criminal and the leader of a hate group.
We both know neither of these statements is true. Yet you keep
repeating them over and over again expecting they will become true.
But we both know you can not alter reality.
Aren't you the insane one Dan Bryenton?
"Evil Incompetent Financial Genius"
Gregg Hagglund SP7
Free Toronto
Toronto and Canadian National Picket Reports now at:
<http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/Spa/8412/toronto/index.html>
"It's interesting that Scientologists cannot seem to differentiate
between:
----individuals:
picketing an organization to voice their opinion on its behavior,
and
-----an organization:
picketing individuals for voicing their opinion."
-M.C.DiPietra
"Give'em hell son." the late M.G.Hagglund
****************************************************
"It's doubtful anyone would heed
a failed businessman with his own "religion"
and other failed sci-fi interests."
-D.Bryenton, 25 year Toronto Org Member & OSA Stooge
****************************************************
John Dorsay
>
> When I look over the names and "handles" of people antipathetic to
> Scientology in this forum, it is an invitation to hate. It is a small
> list of people, made up of even smaller minds and even narrower
> spiritual enlightenment.
<snip>
In message id <8r5ipq$ccd$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, dors...@my-deja.com
wrote:
<snip +++>
> You're in company with bigots, malcontents, drug users, psych patients
What's so bad about being in the company of psych patients, Dan? Please
elaborate.
Do you hate psych patients? Are you inviting others to join you in that
hatred? Or am I misunderstanding your silence with respect to my
request for elaboration?
I asked you this question on September 30. I asked again on October 3.
And now I ask again on October 5. Will you answer my question this
time?
--
Regards, John
Exceedingly Rude and Discourteous Psychiatric Pawn
Read about Scientology and the abuse of survivors of brain injury:
Podkayne1
> There are laws that protect the rights of people and if there's any
> wrong-doing, those same officials will enforce it. They don't need
> bigoted fools to tell them their "jobs".
You mean the fools who keep trying to tell the Canada cops that what
Gregg et al are doing is a "hate crime", despite the cops repeatedly
saying that it *isn't*?
--
John Travolta thinks Scientology is wonderful.
But then, he thinks the "Battlefield Earth" movie is wonderful too.
Think about it.
"You have angered the hedgehog, and now you must pay!"
Podkayne1
> Not for the hard core ARS...for those who lurk and think that there's
> a "legitimacy" to being a bigot. To that extent I post, not for the
> edification of suppressives and PTSes (anti-socials)but for
> someone "looking".
Like your easily disproved "Nigeria has no extradition treaty with the
US"? Like repeatedly calling people "criminals" but being unable to
come up with any convictions?
I'm sure the lurkers were properly edified.
Dave Bird
>When I look over the names and "handles" of people antipathetic to
>Scientology in this forum, it is an invitation to hate. It is a small
>list of people, made up of even smaller minds and even narrower
>spiritual enlightenment.
>
>and some inconstant supporters make up a minority of people ACTUALLY
>in battle or war with my church. Their reasons are spurious and the
>intent is to invite hatred. That is and are the actions of bigots.
>
>No matter what pretext is used, no matter what derrogatory or
>hate. Nothing more.
Uhunh. So people who are murderers and thieving scum are supposed
to just call themselves "church of murderers and thieving scum"
then it is no longer allowed to say "murder is wrong". I see.
You're a loonie, aren't you?
--
' ' ' .:::. ' :: ' ' 'what do Scientologists say when ' http://www.
' (o\ /o) .::. ' you ask why their money-grubbing ' xemu.demon.
' \ " / XEMU ' killed a woman by starvation? ' co.uk '
' '-' :::: ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
' :v: \'''| ' BIGOT BIGOT BIGOT '
' ;;\:::/;;\/ / ' OO / / \ ? '
' ;;;;;;;;;BEER ' (~~) .00 @@-._ \ '
' WithAKick\/ ' ( ) ( =) (O ) ( ") (" )
' 'LikeAnHBomb ' ' ' ' ^^^^ ' ' ^^ ^^ ' ' ' ' ^^ ^^ ' ' "" ' ""
DanRe4712
> In article <16879736...@newz.warzone.edu>, Salvo <re...@to.sender>
wrote:
> >In article <8FC4CFCCAu...@usenet-rulez.net>,
> >HEPPSTARSu...@whoever.com (Baron Von Usenet Dickiemeister)
> >wrote:
> >
> >>|-o-| almost made me puke with the following dirt:
> >>
> >>>On 5 Oct 2000 16:51:02 GMT, HEPPSTARSu...@whoever.com (Baron
> >>>Von Usenet Dickiemeister) wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>|-o-| almost made me puke with the following dirt:
> >>>>>Scientology in this forum, it is an invitation to hate. It is a small
> >>>>>list of people, made up of even smaller minds and even narrower
> >>>>>spiritual enlightenment.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>The list of locals such as Android, Kaeli, Gregg, Wulfen, Mike Argue
> >>>>>and some inconstant supporters make up a minority of people ACTUALLY
> >>>>>in battle or war with my church. Their reasons are spurious and the
> >>>>>intent is to invite hatred. That is and are the actions of bigots.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>No matter what pretext is used, no matter what derrogatory or
> >>>>>inflammatory language or "information" is used - it is an invitation
> >>>>>to hate. Nothing more.
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>And then some
> >>>
> >>I plaidge the Legions to the flag for wich it stands, one nation under God
> >>with Liberty and Justice for all.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>To bad, my athem goes something like this:
> >>
> >>The Old, The Free, The Alphigh North,You lays on Victories from the past
> >>when Your Name was heard all over earth...
> >>
> >> or what ever.
> >
> >You may rank right up there with the stupidest person on Earth. You
> >are being trolled by m...@pln.cc aka m...@altswingers.org and you are
> >following it? He also has alias' danr...@aol.com,
> >cheet...@aol.com (Cheeter4Sex), The Shadow Fluxes <shadowflux>and
> >The Fox Is Hot <fluffyfox>, so far. Visit his sites at www.pln.cc and
> >www.alt.swingers.org and do a search for swingnet, I believe it is
> >..org but not sure. He has a moderated alt. group and he has you
> >dancing like a puppet on a string? *You* may be an excellent troll
> >
> At least a well known one. :)
>
> >but you've been had by an amateur fuck-stick? Please, if you want to
> >troll go right ahead and I will kill-file you but you should have more
> >sense. Either that or he is answering his own bait.
> >
> I think I know who Dan is now. This, probably isn't about MnD. I may sit
> this one out, and hope it doesn't become a full invasion. :/
>
>
No No No, Jet. I am mnd. Tropical Two has stated such. And of course, he is
never wrong.
Raptavio
> Raptavio <lordmagnu...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > In article <8ri9d3$a7t$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> >
> > Why make a post intended for the reasonable, when you say this forum
> is
> > made up of nothing more than the insane?
> >
> > For that matter, you make up part of this forum.
>
> a "legitimacy" to being a bigot. To that extent I post, not for the
> edification of suppressives and PTSes (anti-socials)but for
> someone "looking".
Well you did say "nothing more", dorsai. that means there's no more
than this suppressive core you're speaking of.
And I invite you to continue speaking to the lurkers. The CofS
apparently thinks you're serving their purpose, and the critics sure
think you're serving theirs, so you seem to have unanimous support.
> >
> > Dorsai, the words 'nothing more' appear a lot in your posts. And
they
> > almost invariably appear in places that can turn truthful or at
least
> > defensible statements into complete falsehoods. Are you sure you
don't
> > have an M/U on "nothing more?"
>
> As you're the one with the question, perhaps you have the MU.
Perhaps. Why don't you tell me what it means to you, and we'll see.
> Even less.
>
> Dorsai666
--
"It must be exciting to think that way, but a drag to have to deal with
the clinical diagnosis."
FromTheDes...@stukafox.com
> Dorsai666
Dorsai, can you please quit quoting whole messages to post your
follow-ups? 'Delete' is your friend.
StukaFox
DanRe4712
From: danr...@aol.com (DanRe4712)
Date: 10/5/00 5:51 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id: <20001005205103...@ng-cg1.aol.com>
>Subject: Re: INVITATIONS TO HATE
>From: Salvo re...@to.sender
>Date: 10/5/00 5:41 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <25396536...@newz.warzone.edu>
>
>In article <20001005200258...@ng-ch1.aol.com>,
>danr...@aol.com (DanRe4712) wrote:
>
>>jet <j...@untool.net> wrote in message news:8riugt$ipl$0...@pita.alt.net...
>>> In article <16879736...@newz.warzone.edu>, Salvo <re...@to.sender>
>>wrote:
>>> >In article <8FC4CFCCAu...@usenet-rulez.net>,
>>> >HEPPSTARSu...@whoever.com (Baron Von Usenet Dickiemeister)
>>> >wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>|-o-| almost made me puke with the following dirt:
>>> >>
>>> >>>On 5 Oct 2000 16:51:02 GMT, HEPPSTARSu...@whoever.com (Baron
>>> >>>Von Usenet Dickiemeister) wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>>|-o-| almost made me puke with the following dirt:
>>> >>>>
>Look knuckle-head, you leave too many tracks. Now you are composing
>with agent and posting with ao-hell to impress your fan. Maybe he
>will follow you into alt.swingers.m and you can have a merry ole`
>time. I do not make assumptions until I am sure, and when you made
>your tirade about lying clinched it. You only made one 'and such'
>remark so I was giving you the doubt. TT said it first but everyone
>is not as stupid as you.
>You can wreck this froup because I only pop into it to have a chuckle
>now and again. Just remember not to make the wrong enemies on the way
>out because there may be another cloud of dust in another group near
>and dear to your heart.
>--
>ta ta for now
>
I remember you now. Were you not the one who went crying when j&m complained
that you are nothing but a pimp? Yes, I seem to recall something like that.
Yes, I do. It was brought out about all your failed relationships and how you
can't hold onto a wife and such. And then it was brought out that you pimp
women on web sites. Was that not you? You have as much credibility as Roy
does.
AndroidCat www.xenu.net
> When I look over the names and "handles" of people antipathetic to
> Scientology in this forum, it is an invitation to hate. It is a small
> list of people, made up of even smaller minds and even narrower
> spiritual enlightenment.
How can my name be an invitation to hate??
Ron, cohort of the ilk.
"El Roto"
"Raptavio" <lordmagnu...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8rihar$hav$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <20001005124101...@ng-fx1.aol.com>,
> deom...@aol.comgetlost (DeoMorto) wrote:
> > >
> > >This post is for the reasonable men and women. For we can agree to
> > >disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
> when
> > >we are.
> >
> >
> > have you ever made a post where you admitted that the CofS had done
> anything
> > wrong?
> >
> > Your answer, I fear, supports your contention that only the truly
> insane can
> > never admit to a mistake.
>
> In the interests of honesty, I have seen Dorsai666 admit to being
> wrong. I have also seen him admit the CofS has done something wrong,
> but only in the abstract.
>
I thought of this as well. IIRC, it was regarding his saying "All of the
picketers were on 'psych meds'", which he later modified. Unfortunately,
he's since repeated his misstatement (see below), just like Rinder referring
to Cynthia Kisser as a topless dancer minutes after he admitted that wasn't
true.
Quote: "Their personal lives are filled with mistakes, tragedies, medical
drug use to "temper" this same unreasonableness they not only conduct in
this forum - but their own lives. "
Steve G.
©Anti-Cult® - www.users.wineasy.se/noname/
In Message-ID: <8rioie$o43$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
From: dors...@my-deja.com.
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy..
Wrote on the subject: Re: INVITATIONS TO HATE:
>In article <20001005124101...@ng-fx1.aol.com>,
> deom...@aol.comgetlost (DeoMorto) wrote:
>> >
>> >This post is for the reasonable men and women. For we can agree to
>> >disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
>when
>> >we are.
>>
>> have you ever made a post where you have admitted you were wrong?
>>
>> have you ever made a post where you admitted that the CofS had done
>anything
>> wrong?
>>
>> Your answer, I fear, supports your contention that only the truly
>insane can
>> never admit to a mistake.
>
>ONLY the social personality tries to correct their mistakes. The
>morally reprehensible and anti-social want to remain ignorant and thus
>cannot "see".
>
>Did that answer your question?
>
>Dorsai666
>
I believe it's time to do a per Scientology policy investigation of YOUR
crimes Mr Dan Bryenton.
I seldom fail to find the crimes of criminals....
Sten-Arne
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"The court record is replete with evidence that Scientology is
nothing in reality but a vast enterprise to extract the maximum
amount of money from its adepts by pseudo scientific theories... and
to exercise a kind of blackmail against persons who do not wish to
continue with their sect...The organization clearly is schizophrenic
and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection
of its founder, L.Ron Hubbard."
Judge Paul Breckenridge, Los Angeles Superior Court
---------------------------------------------------------------------
******* Body thetans? We don't need no stinking Body Thetans! *******
*********** http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/index.htm ************
IRC #Scientology JavaChat http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/irc.html
* Multimedia: http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/multimed/index.htm *
******** The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com (Anti-Cult) ********
---------------------------------------------------------------------
©Anti-Cult® - www.users.wineasy.se/noname/
In Message-ID: <8riod4$o1a$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
From: dors...@my-deja.com.
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy..
Wrote on the subject: Re: INVITATIONS TO HATE:
>In article <39dcc24d...@news.zoomnet.net>,
> tinmi...@hotmail.com (mimus) wrote:
>> dors...@my-deja.com posted:
>>
>> >When I look over the names and "handles" of people antipathetic to
>> >Scientology in this forum, it is an invitation to hate. It is a
>small
>> >list of people, made up of even smaller minds and even narrower
>> >spiritual enlightenment.
>> >
>> >The list of locals such as Android, Kaeli, Gregg, Wulfen, Mike Argue
>> >and some inconstant supporters make up a minority of people ACTUALLY
>> >in battle or war with my church. Their reasons are spurious and the
>> >intent is to invite hatred. That is and are the actions of bigots.
>> >
>> >No matter what pretext is used, no matter what derrogatory or
>> >inflammatory language or "information" is used - it is an invitation
>to
>> >hate. Nothing more.
>> >
>> >While it can be hoped that these individuals could and would turn
>over
>> >a "new leaf" so to speak and just get on with their lives and do
>> >something constructive with it, this does not appear to be their
>intent
>> >nor their inclination. Their inclination is to foment hate and to
>> >villify any decent, reasoning group - which just so happens to
>disagree
>> >with their vile behavior both in this forum and outside it.
>> >
>> >Their personal lives are filled with mistakes, tragedies, medical
>drug
>> >use to "temper" this same unreasonableness they not only conduct in
>> >this forum - but their own lives. Why else would one "contribute" to
>> >such a morass of hate inspired and bigoted views. Not a ONE of them
>> >have any interest of participation or contributing for the greater
>good
>> >of others, and so they fight us.
>> >
>> >While there is the invitation to hate them because of their
>destructive
>> >and annoying behavior, I do not. If they were reasonable men &
>women,
>> >we could agree to disagree and get on with what each of us DOES
>believe
>> >in. This is not the case. These are not reasonable men and women,
>> >despite their protestaions to the contrary. They are bigots. Pure
>and
>> >simple.
>> >
>> >While they continue to fight us, we will continue to fight for our
>> >rights...and theirs too. Not in this forum so much as in the halls
>of
>> >government and seeking fair play and justice to pursue our life, our
>> >liberty and our happiness - as we see fit. They (bigots) are
>entitled
>> >to these same rights and unfortunately, do nothing to earn them.
>> >
>> >This post is for the reasonable men and women. For we can agree to
>> >disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
>when
>> >we are. The same cannot be said for the insane. THAT is what this
>> >forum is made up of...nothing more.
>>
>> Reasonableness is "out-ethics", innit?
>
>
>Clear your MisU. There is more than one defintion, though it's
>doubtful if you intended to "understand". It goes along with the self
>importance of "the not quite bright", remember?
>
>Dorsai666
>
>
Yeah well Dan Bryenton, your crimes against humanity and society is
about to be revealed....
AndroidCat www.xenu.net
<The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com> wrote in message
news:b4eqts0d4knfa31fv...@ARSCC.Sweden.Dep.OSA.Surveillance...
If you find anything which involves his family rather than himself, leave it
out, please! (I spit on Dan's threats, but unlike Co$, we just don't do
that!)
And come to think of it, I'm not sure that I like the idea of poking into
and posting his history. This isn't about Dan, this is about the criminal
actions of $cientology, and their possible continuation to this day.
Ah well, do what thou wilt. (Like I can stop you? "Mush you little
tabbies! Mush!")
Ron, cohort of that ilk.
©Anti-Cult® - www.users.wineasy.se/noname/
In Message-ID: <lcbD5.3882$px1....@news20.bellglobal.com>
From: "AndroidCat www.xenu.net" <androi...@hotmail.com>.
Organization: ARSCC(wdne) Toronto Ilk Dirac Angestun Gespt.
I do that, since each member supporting the crime syndicate, must learn
that he is responsible for the actions of the organization.
>
>And come to think of it, I'm not sure that I like the idea of poking into
>and posting his history. This isn't about Dan, this is about the criminal
>actions of $cientology, and their possible continuation to this day.
Without the support of the individual members, scientology wouldn't be
the crime syndicate it is today. That makes each member fully
responsible in my eyes.
>
>Ah well, do what thou wilt. (Like I can stop you? "Mush you little
>tabbies! Mush!")
>
>Ron, cohort of that ilk.
>
>
Sten-Arne, wondering if Brytech would like being implicated openly with
a crime syndicate?
Kaeli
Begging your pardon, I've been willing to sacrifice much more than you are
willing to.
You know very little about me, besides the fact I'm on medication. You
hardly know me at all. I'm sure there will be others who will say they know
me better than you do.
And I would rather not know a thing about you. You scorn those who are
weak, and attempt to physically harm them.
Communication with you is impossible. You will not agree to disagree on
any topic whatsoever unless they see it your way only. There is no point
in communication with someone who is so closed minded.
However, let's get off this dull topic.
I cannot respect any organization who is convicted of breach of the public
trust, who infiltrates our governments in order to corrupt them, and who
will do whatever it takes to ruin other people's freedom of speech and
expression.
The RM group, the copyright terrorism, the DA'ing of critics and the
deliberate plans to emotionally harm them and their families until they
shut up show many others that your organization is completely insane and
without any reason whatsoever. You're not standing for my rights or
anyone's rights but your own and that of your organization.
I recall, a long time ago, I read Richard Behar's article in Time Magazine,
and thought that the CoS was worse than I thought it was. Any group who
would intimidate people and defraud them of their money are people to
avoid. Worse yet, your organization labels itself a church. That in itself
is a mockery and a defamation of the word, "church." Then I read about the
RPF on the Internet. And I thought, wow, they're even worse than Richard
Behar reported. Your organization's attempts to silence people is
despicable. And now, I see your behaviour here on the newsgroup and in
person, and I think the CoS is just pure evil. Period. You call me and
others bigots and part of a hate group. There is stronger proof you are one
yourself. The CoS discriminates against the disabled and the medical
profession, as well as blacks, homosexuals, and even other religions, such
as Wicca, Christianity, or Judaism for example.
You would consider anyone who disagrees with you insane, dorsai. It doesn't
matter whether it's me or someone else. I will not tell you not to believe
in your religious beliefs. If you want to believe that we are all just
thetans operating this body for this lifetime it is your right to believe
it. Yet you will call me names, label me and even assault me in the name
of your organization.
Who is insane, dorsai?
Think about what you are saying first before typing it out.
'
dors...@my-deja.com wrote:
> This post is for the reasonable men and women. For we can agree to
> disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong - when
> we are. The same cannot be said for the insane. THAT is what this
> forum is made up of...nothing more.
>
> Dorsai666
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
--
Kaeli A.
(KoX)
ka...@klis.com
"In this fateful hour, all heaven with its power, the sun with its
brightness, the snow with its whiteness, the fire with all the strength it
hath, the lightning with its rapid wrath, the winds with their swiftness,
the sea with its deepness, the rocks with its starkness, All these I place,
Between myself and the powers of darkness."
Madeline L'Engle, "A Swiftly Twilting Planet"
Mistmagoo55
>From: dors...@my-deja.com
>Date: 10/5/00 12:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <8ri9d3$a7t$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
where you are coming from.
I do. And so I only ask you this....
I believe in truth, and I believe in looking at both sides,and having the right
to speak about both sides. Many a man fought and many died over this very
issue.
So how do YOU feel about this issue now? I know your response: fine..just
fine.
But IF it is just fine, should all not be able to look anywhere on the net and
read whatever they want, without getting into serious ethics trouble? This is
not some pop quiz...........remember, I was exactly where you are at 2 months
ago, so I do understand.
Look at it,,,,take time to think about it.
And then look again.
Good luck!
Tory/ Magoo~dancin in the moonlight~
John C. Randolph
dors...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> When I look over the names and "handles" of people antipathetic to
> Scientology in this forum, it is an invitation to hate.
Hey, we know that elron taught you clams to hate anyone who called him
on the bullshit he was spouting, and we forgive you. You can get
better: Tory and Jesse did, to name two.
>It is a small
> list of people, made up of even smaller minds and even narrower
> spiritual enlightenment.
What would you know about spiritual enlightenment, clambot? You can't
even tell the difference between a church and a criminal enterprise.
Best wishes for a speedy recovery. Hopefully, while you still have two
cents to rub together.
-jcr
barb
visually-impaired, blind and deaf-blind and developer of a
cost-effective vital-signs monitor.
Making the disabled more able?
barb
dors...@my-deja.com
Dear Tory,
You finally originated a communication. Hello.
I do not know much about you, other than what I've read through several
posts and from some of the malcontents/bigots in this forum. I can
state unequivocably that I am not in agreement with the way you've
handled yourself or the situation you were involved in. Personally, I
go to my friends if I'm in trouble, not to the lunatic fringe that
would agree with anything I said, if it happened to jive with their
banks.
If you believed completely in truth, you would be able to be pan-
determined and have the ability to view all sides. Unfortunately, you
have not done so. In actual fact, you have done the reverse and have
gone into opposition with a group that you know full well is pan-
determined and exists only to help others. The same cannot be said
about you, at present.
I would only get into serious "ethics trouble" if I violated my own
personal integrity and/or the agreements that I've made with others.
I operate on the Code of Honor and frankly, don't often get into
trouble. In the context of your statement, I'm posting here aren't I?
The difference is though Tory...I know what I'm looking at when I look
at suppressives or PTSes.
I also know who I am.
Two months ago Tory, you had an opportunity to change a condition if it
were bad, but lacked the personal integrity to do so. If it was wrong
(whatever the situation) there was a way to handle it and you didn't
use any Tech to do so. Now all you do is justify how you didn't handle
it and disperse attention away from that failure.
So, welcome to the little league...you're no longer a player in
changing conditions, but a pawn in a minor game of hate.
To these others you must appear great, after all you can agree together.
To me, you're an ex-scientologist in a lower condition who hasn't the
integrity to tell the "truth", let alone lecture about it.
Do you think this forum is anything but one big reactive mind?
Dorsai666
Perhaps you should look at my post again...that's your new group.
dors...@my-deja.com
dors...@my-deja.com
yduzit...@sympatico.ca wrote:
> Dorsai:
> Pleased be advised that your libellous attacks against me are
> worthless. You are
> in a fog and a froth over nothing at all. NO ONE is going near your
> family -unlike your so-called church which has no ethics what-so-ever-
> they picket Gregg's home and have even tried to DA him through his
> wife's job. This is unethical behaviour.
> Y
>
Yduz,
No. Unethical behavior is doing nothing while your friends, family and
religion are attacked. The wrong thing to do is nothing. Always.
Dorsai666
In Gregg's case, what's good for the goose...
dors...@my-deja.com
> > In article <Rk3D5.295275$Gh.84...@news20.bellglobal.com>,
> > "Devoid" <Dev...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > > <dors...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8ri9d3
> > $a7t$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > >
> > > differences and similarities, Dan
> > >
> > > what was ron's definition of sanity again?
> > >
> > > nice Philisophical positioning thought.
> > >
> > > Devoid
> >
> >
> >
> > You forgot identities.
> >
> >
> >
> > Dorsai666> Tech dic. Def. 6
>
> Devoid
Devo,
CS Series 22, page 2, large script.
Dorsai666
dors...@my-deja.com
the church is not
> objectionable, by any reasonable standard.
>
> Your church is most definitely not fighting for our rights, for
their goal is to
> "clear the planet", and if they ever achieve it, which is highly
unlikely, you
> can bet your rootie patootie the Bill Of Rights will be preplaced by
that anemic
> legal concept called the "comm ev". The very idea of the comm ev
which can
> be brought to bare in a manner characteristic of a kangaroo court
whose arbiters
> consist of small-minded men with hidden agendas operating in the
vacuum of
> the absence of the right to due process, and other legal doctrines
> which have evolved over centuries, is a scary one, to say the least.
>
> No, it is far from perfect, and no legal system can be perfect,
but it is far
> better than what Scientology will offer the world.
>
> No, I'm afraid 'tis better to keep Hubbard in the Cupboard.
>
> You have the right to live your life as you see fit, but know that
your church engages
> in behaviour which is condemnable, and we aren't the only ones
who understand
> this. And we most definitely are not misinformed, which have the
documents to prove it,
> you remain ignorant of the fact.
>
> Phineas Fogg
Dear Foggy,
You vision is still "clouded" with perception based on an observer, not
participant status.
It still comes down to individuals making reasonable/rational decisions
and the breadth of understanding to make the correct one(s). Nothing
ever changes...but I hope you get the same justice you meet out.
Chris Leithiser
$cientology mocked up this big reactive mind. Now they can't get rid of
it.
$cientology can't go clear as long as a.r.s. is around. And there ain't
a damned thing they can do about it--no clears, no OT's. Not one.
dors...@my-deja.com
Gregg,
What is hateful is your bait and switch and constant lying to the end
of having others believe your propaganda - when they shouldn't trust
the information of a BIGOT.
YOU have never taken a course, read a book or applied any of the tenets
of Scientology. Are consumers so stupid in your mind, that they can't
make up their minds for themselves?
We're not "selling" anything Gregg, unless you class books like the
bible a "product", which to a publisher it would be...to a church, it
would be the basis of their beliefs. Would it not? I guess when you
finally get around to proclaiming your religion, that too would be
a "product"?
Oh yeah, we don't have any rights, right Gregg?
>
> Were the above not true, then they would be defamations of
> Corporate Scientology and we both know Co$ has the money and the
> lawyers to force me to retract or cease to utter or print them.
Half-truths take time to document. So do hate crimes. Be patient.
>
> .
>
> Tell me Dan Bryenton, why is it that Scientology and yourself
> continuously complain of "hate' crimes being committed against your
> criminal corporation by myself, yet the Hate Crimes Unit and other
> members of the Toronto Police force and even higher levels of
> government have told you ever again: Criticism is protected by the
> Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Please, keep believing your own propaganda...
>
> I expect you *do* hate what I have to say and by Hubbard
> policy you hate me.
> However *I* do not hate you. I dislike you, yes. I dislike you
> personally for what you do, say, condone and support.
What you have is your own narrow-minded view. You ONLY operate on
hate, as this is what you promote in your posts and in your actions.
I know who my friends are. I also know my enemies by their acts, not
by hearsay. You're way past the point of hearsay - bigot.
>
> This has never been about 'belief sets' but about Hubbards'
> criminal policies and doctrines which condone and mandate, even demand
> the abuse of individuals within and without Scientology and similarly
> the abuse of and disregard for democratic law.
It is exactly our beliefs that you are in opposition to, because if
you're in this much trouble with people ignorant, what would it be like
with brighter people seeing you for what you are.
On Rights...
Thats why the Declaration of International Rights has been originated
by the IAS amd signed by many government leaders, because we don't
believe in democracy and we abuse people's rights...
No. Like always, you deal in a reversal of truth. In other words -
LYING.
>
> You keep calling me a criminal and the leader of a hate group.
> We both know neither of these statements is true. Yet you keep
> repeating them over and over again expecting they will become true.
> But we both know you can not alter reality.
Hitler was a criminal. He was also a leader of a hate group.
Sometimes minor criminals aren't exposed for what they are, until it's
too late.
He too used half-truths, lies and propaganda to serve his own ends.
The only difference is that you're not Hitler. I see "reality". You
see "enemies" - of your own manufacture. Again, not too disimilar to
Hitler who made the "first move" against his neighbors.
I could go on with this analogy, but you see the point?
You ARE a criminal. Your are a bigot. You are a liar and a fraud.
Nothing more.
Dorsai666
One learns from past mistakes or he is doomed to repeat them...
>
> >
> "Evil Incompetent
>
> Gregg Hagglund SP7
> enslave Toronto
>
>
>
> >
> ****************************************************
>
> "It's doubtful anyone would heed
> a failed businessman with his own "religion"
> and other failed sci-fi interests."
> > ****************************************************
Roland
Yakakakaka!!
Your name's out. Your address is out. The evil SP's are out there
Dorsai. They are hiding under the bushes waiting to pounce on you.
Christ - them freezoners and sending intention beams at your BT's to get
them to cave you in. SP's have been sneeking round to your employer and
giving them DA information. Go in on Monday and God but will you get a
bad look. Have the SP's been able to implant the rats that are creeping
up from your basement into and under the floorboards at this very
moment. Can't you hear those scratches with your theta hearing?
Goddam SP's. Eeeeevil servants of the Psych Lords. They've come for you,
Dorsai. Thev see you as a threat to their plans to take over the galaxy.
They se you as a strong friend of LRH who they are afraid of and so they
have come for you.
Got to do something, Dorsai. Got to help LRH. Got to do the greatest
good for the greater number of dynamics. Got to not be afraid to hurt
another in a just cause. Got to strike a blow against the enemy. Got to
dispose of quietly and without sorrow. Got to rid thois world of all
leprosy thought the simple expedient of disposing of all beggars. But
which Knight in Shining Armor is capable of this? Surely there is none
so bold - so pur - so "ethical" ???
There is?
And it is YOU?
KILL, Dorsai.
KILL, KILL, KILL - for LRH - Mankind's Greatest Friend !!!!!
Roland
--
"I notice that we all believe that Venus has a methane atmosphere and
is unlivable. I almost got run down by a freight locomotive the other
day -- didn't look very uncivilized to me." - L. Ron Hubbard,
"Between Lives Implants" lecture, SHSBC #317. 23 July 1963.
http://www.xs4all.nl/~xemu/rams/Venusloc.ram
dors...@my-deja.com
kaeli,
Espousing further lies and quoting from liars, doesn't make that
information anything more than... lies, does it?
The fact is, we've not ever harmed you. By the same token, you villify
and condemn us - publicly. Being critical has the connotation of the
person being in disagreement and stating so...I got that. Bigotry is
espousing falsehoods and half-truths in an attempt to win over people
to a narrow-minded and prejudiced point of view. You haven't got that.
You practice bigotry all the time. By definition. This doesn't upset
you, you merely refute the truth of the definition and say it isn't so.
Well, believe what you want to believe Kaeli, but I think your post
says it all...have truths, lies and innuendo from a person on anti-
depressents. The Church doesn't agree with the use of these drugs and
thus you fight us. I have done all I can to show you the information
on these and again refer you to drugawareness.net
Don't take my word for it. Get the opinions of MDs.
Dorsai666
dors...@my-deja.com
Gerry Armstrong <arms...@dowco.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Oct 2000 16:14:35 GMT, dors...@my-deja.com wrote:
Hey!
Look what the cat dragged in...
>
> >When I look over the names and "handles" of people antipathetic to
> >Scientology in this forum, it is an invitation to hate.
>
> Many things to $cientologists, especially $cientologists with
> functions like yours, are invitations to hate. $cientology is as you
> know a hate group.
>
> > It is a small
> >list of people, made up of even smaller minds and even narrower
> >spiritual enlightenment.
>
> The only enlightened $cientologists are born-again wogs (R).
>
> >
> >The list of locals such as Android, Kaeli, Gregg, Wulfen, Mike Argue
> >and some inconstant supporters make up a minority of people ACTUALLY
> >in battle or war with my church.
>
> Heh, Dan, every wog (R) is at war with your cult. Many wogs (R) aren't
> even aware that you $cientologists have initiated your insane War On
> Wogs (WOW!) (R), and fighting the war has fallen to a few good wogs
> (R). But that is changing because wogs (R) are waking all around the
> world. Android, Kaeli, Gregg, Wulfen and Mike Argue are the aware wogs
> (R), the enlightened ones, the ones who have been fighting the insane
> war Hubbard postulated. Soon these fighters will be relieved by 15
> wogs (R) each. You are surrounded. All $cientologists are surrounded.
>
> > Their reasons are spurious and the
> >intent is to invite hatred. That is and are the actions of bigots.
>
> $cientology is the religion of bigotry.
>
> >
> >No matter what pretext is used, no matter what derrogatory or
> >inflammatory language or "information" is used - it is an invitation
to
> >hate. Nothing more.
>
> Yes, right out of the mind of L. Ron Hubbard. Have you read his
> "Admissions," Dan?
>
> http://holysmoke.org/ga/admissions.pdf
>
> Don't you get that a man who would postulate that "men are my slaves"
> is a hater?
>
> >
> >While it can be hoped that these individuals could and would turn
over
> >a "new leaf" so to speak and just get on with their lives and do
> >something constructive with it, this does not appear to be their
intent
> >nor their inclination.
>
> They're you're wrong. Your cult wants to dispose of wogs (R) you don't
> like quietly and without sorrow. These individual wogs (R) stand in
> your way. The prevention of the holocaust Hubbard urged is very
> constructive. You should thank these folks from preventing you from
> doing more evil than you've already done.
>
> I would urge you to apologize to all of them. And then join them in
> their opposition to $cientology's insane War On Wogs (WOW!) (R).
>
> > Their inclination is to foment hate and to
> >villify any decent, reasoning group -
>
> Absolutely untrue. Now you know that $cientology is not a decent
> reasoning group. It cannot be vilified. That's the significance of the
> $cientology v. Time decision.
>
> >which just so happens to disagree
> >with their vile behavior both in this forum and outside it.
>
> Of course $cientology disagrees. $cientology is a criminal
> organization with the hidden ev purp of disposing of undesirables
> quietly and without sorrow.
>
> Again, Dan, just apologize to the Toronto Contingent, and then go
> picket with them against your criminal cult. Become a born-again wogs
> (R) today.
>
> >
> >Their personal lives are filled with mistakes, tragedies, medical
drug
> >use to "temper" this same unreasonableness they not only conduct in
> >this forum - but their own lives.
>
> Oh, bullshit.
>
> > Why else would one "contribute" to
> >such a morass of hate inspired and bigoted views. Not a ONE of them
> >have any interest of participation or contributing for the greater
good
> >of others, and so they fight us.
>
> Their fighting *is* for the good of others. They are stopping death's
> dark curtain that $cientology would drop on humanity. You are just
> forwarding $cientology's hidden ev purp.
>
> >
> >While there is the invitation to hate them because of their
destructive
> >and annoying behavior, I do not.
>
> Sure you do. Every $cientologist hates them. If you stopped hating
> them you'd be a wog (R).
>
> > If they were reasonable men & women,
> >we could agree to disagree and get on with what each of us DOES
believe
> >in.
>
> What liars $cientologist are. You actually despise reasonable men and
> women. Being reasonable in $cientology is cause for punishment. Your
> philosophy is insane.
>
> > This is not the case. These are not reasonable men and women,
> >despite their protestaions to the contrary. They are bigots. Pure
and
> >simple.
>
> Oh sure, people who stand up and prevent $cientology's postulated
> quiet, sorrowless disposal of society's "undesirables," are bigots.
> What a laugh. They're heroes.
>
> If you weren't such a coward, fighting your dirty covert War On Wogs
> (WOW!) (R), you could be a hero too.
>
> >
> >While they continue to fight us, we will continue to fight for our
> >rights
>
> Your right to dispose of wogs (R) you deem undesirable quietly and
> without sorrow. You have no such right. Your criminal cult is stopped
> in its tracks. You are surrounded. You have no way out but to
> apologize.
>
> >...and theirs too. Not in this forum so much as in the halls of
> >government and seeking fair play and justice to pursue our life, our
> >liberty and our happiness - as we see fit.
>
> You think you will be as Hubbard promises happy and uptone once you
> dispose of all the wog (R) undesirables quietly and without sorrow,
> but you will never be. Even if you achieved your evil purpose, and
> successfully disposed of all the people you designate "undesirable,"
> you would not be happy, because you would all kills yourselves. But
> you will never be allowed to achieve your evil purpose. Wogs (R) upon
> wogs (R) upon wogs (R), as far as the eye can see, in every country of
> the world, billions upon billions of wogs (R) stand in your way.
>
> Now, just a handful of brave wogs (R) stop you and your criminal cult
> in your mad evil plan. When all the sleeping wogs (R) wake you will
> have no way out. Now is the time to apologize.
>
> > They (bigots) are entitled
> >to these same rights and unfortunately, do nothing to earn them.
>
> Wogs (R) have earned you every right you possess today, clam boy. Say
> thanks and apologize while you still can.
>
> >
> >This post is for the reasonable men and women. For we can agree to
> >disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
when
> >we are.
>
> Well then let's start with what happened. Do you acknowldge that you
> are the Dan who assaulted me October 16, 1999 in front of the Toronto
> org?
>
> > The same cannot be said for the insane. THAT is what this
> >forum is made up of...nothing more.
>
> I would be careful with those postulates, Dan. You are surrounded and
> in no position to be calling wogs (R) names.
>
> (c) Gerry Armstrong
dors...@my-deja.com
ptsc <pt...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Oct 2000 16:14:35 GMT, dors...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >This post is for the reasonable men and women.
>
>
> >For we can agree to
> >disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
when
> >we are.
>
> >forum is made up of...nothing more.
>
wrong.
>
> When you LIED and said that Gregg was a "criminal" and that you
had "proof."
> He isn't and he didn't, and you LIED, and since you're INSANE you
can't admit
> it.
>
> When you said Bob Minton was a criminal and had been INDICTED
> you LIED and you DIDN'T post an INDICTMENT. Because you didn't have
it, because
> there isn't one.
>
> And since you're "insane" you can't admit it, even though you're
wrong.
>
> ptsc
You're entitled to an opinion (and not much else) but what's your
excuse at being wrong so often?
By the way, it's not that I'm ever wrong. It's that I'm right more
often than not. There's a difference.
|-o-|
And then some
dors...@my-deja.com
<b4eqts0d4knfa31fv...@ARSCC.Sweden.Dep.OSA.Surveillance>,
©Anti-Cult® - www.users.wineasy.se/noname/
(should read) I seldom see the truth because of my crimes
>
> Sten-Arne
Wow, another pawn in this game called hate. Could it get more personal?
Come ahead little one... the prince of darkness awaits you (to all you
paranoid buffs out there).
Dorsai666
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> "The court record is replete with evidence that Scientology is
> nothing in reality but a vast enterprise to extract the maximum
> amount of money from its adepts by pseudo scientific theories... and
> to exercise a kind of blackmail against persons who do not wish to
> continue with their sect...The organization clearly is schizophrenic
> and paranoid, and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection
> of its founder, L.Ron Hubbard."
>
> Judge Paul Breckenridge, Los Angeles Superior Court
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> ******* Body thetans? We don't need no stinking Body Thetans! *******
> *********** http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/index.htm ************
> IRC #Scientology JavaChat http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/irc.html
> * Multimedia: http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/multimed/index.htm *
> ******** The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com (Anti-Cult) ********
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
Ibid.
Who would trust a fair weather friend?
A friend, a true friend, is willing to talk, even after someone accuses
you of being evil.
--
yduzitmatter
>
>
> Yduz,
>
> No. Unethical behavior is doing nothing while your friends, family and
> religion are attacked. The wrong thing to do is nothing. Always.
>
> Dorsai666
So we are being ethical then -we are not standing by while you and your Cult
attack Gregg and others simply because they have taken a stand against the
illegal, unethical and immoral practices of the COS. Thank - you
Y
Kaeli
You again try to invalidate me on the basis I take anti-depressants.
You do not know what I practice all the time. You, dear Dan, don't know me
at all.
Try to disprove the EFF's reporting on the CoS, Dan. The Internet is what I
care for the most, and your group is trying to destroy it. I refer you to
http://www.eff.org.
Kaeli
You do not know how I feel about the whole situation. If you do, you
wouldn't be saying I was practicing "hate" and "bigotry".
I will speak out on the newsgroup because I can speak out here. It appears
your people call people insane due to the fact they disagree with you.
dors...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <h4uptskak24kbi8i3...@4ax.com>,
> ptsc <pt...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 05 Oct 2000 16:14:35 GMT, dors...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> > >This post is for the reasonable men and women.
> >
> > [To laugh at]
> >
> > >For we can agree to
> > >disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
> when
> > >we are.
> >
> > >The same cannot be said for the insane. THAT is what this
> > >forum is made up of...nothing more.
> >
> > Yes, that's true, you are indeed insane. You can't admit you are
> wrong.
> >
> > When you LIED and said that Gregg was a "criminal" and that you
> had "proof."
> > He isn't and he didn't, and you LIED, and since you're INSANE you
> can't admit
> > it.
> >
> > When you said Bob Minton was a criminal and had been INDICTED
> > you LIED and you DIDN'T post an INDICTMENT. Because you didn't have
> it, because
> > there isn't one.
> >
> > And since you're "insane" you can't admit it, even though you're
> wrong.
> >
> > ptsc
>
> You're entitled to an opinion (and not much else) but what's your
> excuse at being wrong so often?
>
> By the way, it's not that I'm ever wrong. It's that I'm right more
> often than not. There's a difference.
>
Chris Leithiser
> Hitler was a criminal. He was also a leader of a hate group.
> Sometimes minor criminals aren't exposed for what they are, until it's
> too late.
Hubbard was a criminal, and the leader of a hate group. The rest of
your paragraph applies perfectly to him.
Had he been helped when he _begged_ for psychiatric assistance, the
world would be a better place. Just a little, but better.
> He too used half-truths, lies and propaganda to serve his own ends.
Yes, Hubbard did all that.
> The only difference is that you're not Hitler. I see "reality". You
> see "enemies" - of your own manufacture. Again, not too disimilar to
> Hitler who made the "first move" against his neighbors.
Hubbard, like Hitler, needed his manufactured "enemies." He needed
someone to point at, lest you look at _him_ too closely.
> I could go on with this analogy, but you see the point?
Oh, quite clearly. You, however, don't.
> You ARE a criminal. Your are a bigot. You are a liar and a fraud.
Keep repeating the "big lie." It worked for Hubbard, right? _You_
aren't insane, just because you keep doing the same thing over and over
and expecting a different result.
>
> Nothing more.
"Only this...and nothing more."
>
> Dorsai666
>
> One learns from past mistakes or he is doomed to repeat them...
Then why are you still in 1950? Come up to present time.
Brent Stone
Hmmmm... what happened to those "friends" when she changed her mind?
Maybe they're only friends when what she says "jives with their banks".
>If you believed completely in truth, you would be able to be pan-
>determined and have the ability to view all sides. Unfortunately, you
>have not done so. In actual fact, you have done the reverse and have
>gone into opposition with a group that you know full well is pan-
>determined and exists only to help others. The same cannot be said
>about you, at present.
That's a good one!! You're saying she hasn't viewed all sides? The
30 years in Scientology don't count? You of course, are the picture
of "viewing all sides", right?
>I would only get into serious "ethics trouble" if I violated my own
>personal integrity and/or the agreements that I've made with others.
>I operate on the Code of Honor and frankly, don't often get into
>trouble. In the context of your statement, I'm posting here aren't I?
>The difference is though Tory...I know what I'm looking at when I look
>at suppressives or PTSes.
And you're saying she doesn't know anything about what you call
"suppressives" and "PTSes"? It seems to me that she's found them
to be vastly different than what you've been told. She's had the
ability to look at both groups closely, have you?
Certainly you operate using the "Code of Honor"<snicker> like a good
Ronbot is supposed to. Especially point 12 - "Never fear to hurt
another in a just cause." Unfortunately, the "Code of Honor" is
rather misnamed. (Of course, it helps if you predefine Scientology
to be a "just cause" without looking at the facts first, too).
>I also know who I am.
Yeah, Dan, we know who you are too. You show it very clearly in your
posts.
>Two months ago Tory, you had an opportunity to change a condition if it
>were bad, but lacked the personal integrity to do so. If it was wrong
>(whatever the situation) there was a way to handle it and you didn't
>use any Tech to do so. Now all you do is justify how you didn't handle
>it and disperse attention away from that failure.
Doing what Ron says is now defined as "personal integrity"? Have you
read her posts? Have you seen the things she has been standing for,
both inside and outside of the "church"?
>So, welcome to the little league...you're no longer a player in
>changing conditions, but a pawn in a minor game of hate.
>
>To these others you must appear great, after all you can agree together.
>To me, you're an ex-scientologist in a lower condition who hasn't the
>integrity to tell the "truth", let alone lecture about it.
Are you invalidating her "wins"? Isn't this a crime in Scientology?
Nice lecture on "truth" though, Dan. Since we all see how carefully
you always stick to the truth, it's good to see you at least think
that truth is valuable. Now, if you could only work that thought into
you own actions, things would be great.
Like has been said here many times before, how do you know before
you've tried it? How can you know how well she's doing now? Have
you tried stepping out of Scientology for a while? Do you know how
you'd feel if you did?
>Do you think this forum is anything but one big reactive mind?
Nice touch, but the "reactive mind" doesn't exist either, that's just
another fantasy of your guru.
>Dorsai666
>
>Perhaps you should look at my post again...that's your new group.
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
- Brent
Brent Stone
>In article <39DCF6B7...@sympatico.ca>,
> yduzit...@sympatico.ca wrote:
>> Dorsai:
>> Pleased be advised that your libellous attacks against me are
>> worthless. You are
>> in a fog and a froth over nothing at all. NO ONE is going near your
>> family -unlike your so-called church which has no ethics what-so-ever-
>> they picket Gregg's home and have even tried to DA him through his
>> wife's job. This is unethical behaviour.
>> Y
>>
>
>
>Yduz,
>
>No. Unethical behavior is doing nothing while your friends, family and
>religion are attacked. The wrong thing to do is nothing. Always.
And the right thing to do? "Always attack, never defend"? No matter what.
Don't look at why, don't look at whether there is valid criticism, just
call it an "attack", and go out and "destroy the enemy". Right?
Why haven't you answered the questions "yduzitmatter" asked? Because you
can't while still holding to your contention that there is no valid
criticism of your crime cult? Look at the questions, research the answers
if you have to, and figure out why there are what you call "attacks" on
your organization. Then maybe you can begin to work on the corrections
to the problems -- the problems won't go away if you ignore them.
If people ~inside~ the organization would correct things that are wrong,
there would be no need for those outside to help "put ethics in".
- Brent
Brent Stone
<snip>
>I hope you get the same justice you meet out.
>
>Dorsai666
Do I see another .sig here?
- Brent
Tommy
>
>
> There are laws that protect the rights of people
Wog laws? What the hell do you care about Wog laws?
Tell me another.
Tommy
--
"It's doubtful anyone would heed a failed
businessman with his own "religion" and other failed sci-fi interests."
"Dorsai666" Dan Bryenton, posted to a.r.s.
Tommy
If you don't know much about her, how can you invalidate the way she's
handled herself?
Or is your bigotry against anyone who leaves the Co$ showing?
> Personally, I go to my friends if I'm in trouble,
Your so-called "friends" are all $cientologists. They will KR you in a
New York minute if you step out of line.
These aren't friends, these are Stasi.
> not to the lunatic fringe that would agree with anything I said, if it happened to jive with their
> banks.
And BANG goes another irony meter..
>
> If you believed completely in truth, you would be able to be pan-
> determined and have the ability to view all sides. Unfortunately, you
> have not done so. In actual fact, you have done the reverse and have
> gone into opposition with a group that you know full well is pan-
> determined and exists only to help others. The same cannot be said
> about you, at present.
>
> I would only get into serious "ethics trouble" if I violated my own
> personal integrity and/or the agreements that I've made with others.
> I operate on the Code of Honor and frankly, don't often get into
> trouble. In the context of your statement, I'm posting here aren't I?
> The difference is though Tory...I know what I'm looking at when I look
> at suppressives or PTSes.
You're looking in a mirror .
>
> I also know who I am.
No, you know who hubbard *told* you you were. And you bought it.
>
> Two months ago Tory, you had an opportunity to change a condition if it
> were bad, but lacked the personal integrity to do so.
You wouldn't know personal integrity if your bosses force-fed it to you
like cal-mag.
> If it was wrong (whatever the situation) there was a way to handle it and you didn't
> use any Tech to do so.
Interesting how someone who (by their own admission) doesn't know
anything about what happened to Tory is already convinced that she
didn't use "the tech".
> Now all you do is justify how you didn't handle
> it and disperse attention away from that failure.
You incredible imbecile, she is OT VII!
Do you understand that? OT VII!!!
A higher level than you will *ever* attain.
Ever.
Miscavige and his squirreling sycophants have started running mandatory
Sec Checks TWICE A YEAR ao *all* OT VII completions. This isn't in the
"tech" volumes. it isn't in ANY policy letter, it is purely designed to
bilk money out of every so-called OT.
She TRIED to go through channels and they SHAT on her.
the orders for this came all the way from the top.
> To these others you must appear great, after all you can agree together.
> To me, you're an ex-scientologist in a lower condition
Looks like she's at cause over you. What condition does this place *you*
in ?
> who hasn't the integrity to tell the "truth", let alone lecture about it.
You should listen to your betters.
>
> Do you think this forum is anything but one big reactive mind?
>
Let me give you the Clear Cognition - there IS no reactive mind.
You're mocking it up. You're creating your own enemies.
hubbard said so.
Don't you believe him?
Or are you smarter than he was?
John C. Randolph
I don't feel like wading through the jargon, but he seems to be claiming
that he's on the side of truth, justice, etc, and the critics aren't.
"Pan-determined"? Who in the world comes up with this gibberish?
Have at it!
-jcr
John C. Randolph
dors...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> In article <h4uptskak24kbi8i3...@4ax.com>,
> ptsc <pt...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 05 Oct 2000 16:14:35 GMT, dors...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> > >This post is for the reasonable men and women.
> >
> > [To laugh at]
> >
> > >For we can agree to
> > >disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
> when
> > >we are.
> >
> > >The same cannot be said for the insane. THAT is what this
> > >forum is made up of...nothing more.
> >
> > Yes, that's true, you are indeed insane. You can't admit you are
> wrong.
> >
> > When you LIED and said that Gregg was a "criminal" and that you
> had "proof."
> > He isn't and he didn't, and you LIED, and since you're INSANE you
> can't admit
> > it.
> >
> > When you said Bob Minton was a criminal and had been INDICTED
> > you LIED and you DIDN'T post an INDICTMENT. Because you didn't have
> it, because
> > there isn't one.
> >
> > And since you're "insane" you can't admit it, even though you're
> wrong.
> >
> > ptsc
>
> You're entitled to an opinion (and not much else) but what's your
> excuse at being wrong so often?
>
> By the way, it's not that I'm ever wrong. It's that I'm right more
> often than not. There's a difference.
How about apologizing to Greg, clambot? The documents you posted backed
him up, not you.
-jcr
Phineas Fogg
<dors...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8rl4i9$kg1$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <EZ5D5.4158$cV2.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> "Phineas Fogg" <lao...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > <dors...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8ri9d3
> $a7t$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > > disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
> when
> > > we are. The same cannot be said for the insane. THAT is what this
> > > forum is made up of...nothing more.
> > >
>
> Dorsai666
I did not have to participate in Hiroshima to make rational decisions about it,
and so your logic wanes.
That plus I was active in the Church for nine years, so your argument is moot to boot.
You, as always, offer nothing of substance, just name calling, fist pounding, etc.,
If you are offering yourself as an example of a product of Scientology, I don't think
you will find many intelligent buyers.
Every time life offers you the opportunity to take the high road, you take the low road.
And you go on screaming that Scientology is a religion, but you are the very embodiment
of mediocrity.
Phineas Fogg
Phineas Fogg
Phineas Fogg
<dors...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8rl8li$n90$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <h4uptskak24kbi8i3...@4ax.com>,
> ptsc <pt...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 05 Oct 2000 16:14:35 GMT, dors...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > >For we can agree to
> > >disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
> when
> > >we are.
> >
> > >The same cannot be said for the insane. THAT is what this
> > >forum is made up of...nothing more.
> >
> wrong.
> >
> > When you LIED and said that Gregg was a "criminal" and that you
> had "proof."
> > He isn't and he didn't, and you LIED, and since you're INSANE you
> can't admit
> > it.
> >
> > When you said Bob Minton was a criminal and had been INDICTED
> > you LIED and you DIDN'T post an INDICTMENT. Because you didn't have
> it, because
> > there isn't one.
> >
> > And since you're "insane" you can't admit it, even though you're
> wrong.
> >
> > ptsc
>
>
>
> You're entitled to an opinion (and not much else) but what's your
> excuse at being wrong so often?
>
> By the way, it's not that I'm ever wrong. It's that I'm right more
> often than not. There's a difference.
>
Wishful thinking, at best.
Phineas Fogg
Phineas Fogg
<dors...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8rl3qd$k1g$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <20001006025844...@ng-fj1.aol.com>,
> mistm...@aol.com (Mistmagoo55) wrote:
> > >Subject: INVITATIONS TO HATE
> > >From: dors...@my-deja.com
> > >Date: 10/5/00 12:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time
> > >Message-id: <8ri9d3$a7t$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
> > >
> > >disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
> when
> > >we are. The same cannot be said for the insane. THAT is what this
> > >forum is made up of...nothing more.
> > >
Tory is a being who managed to unshackle herself from ideological chains,
she was very lucky, and very courageous. She is to be applauded.
If you are searching for integrity, you had better change your religion.
Why don't you go join some insipid forum for Scientologists only, there
you will be stroked by those who are like you, and you might think that
such support is best for you, but you are only being stroked.
Reality, life itself, is that crucible from which the steel of truth is tempered,
not the ideological greenhouse you call Scientology.
Scientologists are not your friends, they will abandon you the moment
you change your philosophical tune.
Phineas Fogg
Island Boy
> No. Unethical behavior is doing nothing while your friends, family and
> religion are attacked. The wrong thing to do is nothing. Always.
That is *EXACTLY* why I protest the Scientology organizaion.
> Dorsai666
---
"I want to dance." --- Lisa McPherson, 18 Nov 95 http://holysmoke.org/lm/lm.htm
David Rice, "rogue canceler."
"Scientology is 1% artificially flavored religious product. It is 99%
crime syndicate. I have no interest in the 1%. Get it?" --- barb
Mike O'Connor
>In article <39DCF6B7...@sympatico.ca>,
> yduzit...@sympatico.ca wrote:
>> Dorsai:
>> Pleased be advised that your libellous attacks against me are
>> worthless. You are
>> in a fog and a froth over nothing at all. NO ONE is going near your
>> family -unlike your so-called church which has no ethics what-so-ever-
>> they picket Gregg's home and have even tried to DA him through his
>> wife's job. This is unethical behaviour.
>No. Unethical behavior is doing nothing while your friends, family and
>religion are attacked. The wrong thing to do is nothing. Always.
++++++++++++ SACRED CULT SCRIPTURE +++++++++++++
Don't ever do nothing. Unexpected attacks in the rear of the enemies
front ranks work best.
It is my specific intention that by the use of professional PR (black
PR) tactics any opposition not only be dulled but permanently
iradicated.
-- L. Ron Hubbard
HCOPL 30 may 1974
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
--
SCIENTOLOGY IS SECRETLY A UFO CULT
ASK THEM ABOUT XENU
Mike O'Connor <mi...@leptonicsystems.com>
<http://www.leptonicsystems.com>
Byll23
>In article <39DCF6B7...@sympatico.ca>,
> yduzit...@sympatico.ca wrote:
>> Dorsai:
>> Pleased be advised that your libellous attacks against me are
>> worthless. You are
>> in a fog and a froth over nothing at all. NO ONE is going near your
>> family -unlike your so-called church which has no ethics what-so-ever-
>> they picket Gregg's home and have even tried to DA him through his
>> wife's job. This is unethical behaviour.
>> Y
>>
>
>
>Yduz,
>
>No. Unethical behavior is doing nothing while your friends, family and
>religion are attacked. The wrong thing to do is nothing. Always.
So it's _right_ for you to endorse the harassment of Gregg's family, then?
Raptavio
"\"El Roto\"" <fin...@google.com> wrote:
>
> "Raptavio" <lordmagnu...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:8rihar$hav$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > In article <20001005124101...@ng-fx1.aol.com>,
> > deom...@aol.comgetlost (DeoMorto) wrote:
> > > >
to
> > > >disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're
wrong -
> > when
> > > >we are.
> > >
> > >
> > > have you ever made a post where you admitted that the CofS had
done
> > anything
> > > wrong?
> > >
> > > Your answer, I fear, supports your contention that only the truly
> > insane can
> > > never admit to a mistake.
> >
> > wrong. I have also seen him admit the CofS has done something wrong,
> > but only in the abstract.
> >
>
> I thought of this as well. IIRC, it was regarding his saying "All of
the
> picketers were on 'psych meds'", which he later modified.
Unfortunately,
> he's since repeated his misstatement (see below), just like Rinder
referring
> to Cynthia Kisser as a topless dancer minutes after he admitted that
wasn't
> true.
>
> Quote: "Their personal lives are filled with mistakes, tragedies,
medical
> drug use to "temper" this same unreasonableness they not only conduct
in
> this forum - but their own lives. "
Yes, I saw that, Steve. I elected to give Dorsai the benefit of the
doubt on that one.
--
"It must be exciting to think that way, but a drag to have to deal with
the clinical diagnosis."
Byll23
>By the way, it's not that I'm ever wrong. It's that I'm right more
>often than not. There's a difference.
Hmmm... You've been wrong an awful lot though. Take this example: A week or so
ago, I asked you why Nigeria hasn't requested Bob's extradition. You said "the
US doesn't have an extradition treaty with Nigeria, as you well know." I knew
nothing of the sort, because to be perfectly honest, the average person neither
knows nor cares what countries the US has treaties with. But, with the
internet, it's easy to find these things out. 2 minutes (50 keystrokes and four
mouseclicks) later, I found out that the US _does_ have such a treaty with
Nigeria, for more than 60 years.
Now, I can think of a couple reasons why you didn't search yourself. 1) You
honestly thought that the US didn't have such a treaty. But I doubt that,
because very few people care much about such things. Most people who do care
would still _check_, just in case. 2) You were lazy and/or purposely lying and
hoped we wouldn't notice. I think this much more likely, given teh character
you've exhibited here.
So, are you going to "confront" yet? Or are you still "Hiding"? (-8, right?)
ptsc
>Two months ago Tory, you had an opportunity to change a condition if it
>were bad, but lacked the personal integrity to do so. If it was wrong
>(whatever the situation) there was a way to handle it and you didn't
>use any Tech to do so. Now all you do is justify how you didn't handle
>it and disperse attention away from that failure.
That's like claiming that Rommel "lacked the personal integrity" to fix what was
wrong with the Nazi party and that it was an ethical failure for him instead to
try to help assassinate Hitler.
That's like claiming that Sammy "the Bull" violating integrity by testifying
against the Mafia, because he didn't have the "ethics" to remain a good Mafia
criminal.
ptsc
ptsc
>In article <h4uptskak24kbi8i3...@4ax.com>,
> ptsc <pt...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>You're entitled to an opinion (and not much else) but what's your
>excuse at being wrong so often?
Dear Dan Bryenton (DB)
>By the way, it's not that I'm ever wrong. It's that I'm right more
>often than not. There's a difference.
ROFL! By the way, dipshit, please post specific statements that I've been wrong
on, and then provide evidence that they're wrong. I bet you can't provide a
single one.
I have provided numerous specific examples of where you have been wrong, or
outright lied, and haven't yet admitted it.
You said that Gregg Hagglund was a "criminal" and that you had "proof."
He isn't and you don't. You LIED. You haven't admitted this or posted proof of
"crimes" which you don't have, because Gregg isn't a "criminal."
You stated that Bob Minton had been indicted for fraud in Nigeria. You also
stated that he is "wanted" in Nigeria. You also stated that he wasn't willing
to return to Nigeria to answer any questions the Nigerian Senate has for him.
All three were lies. Bob Minton has not been indicted. There have been
numerous news stories at every stage in the Nigerian events, and not one
indicates that Minton is indicted. Certainly if he were indicted this would
have been reported. It hasn't been, and in fact has never happened. You
repeated this statement endlessly. It wasn't true. You knew it wasn't true and
kept repeating it. You LIED.
You also stated that Bob Minton was "wanted" in Nigeria. This also isn't true,
as he isn't wanted for anything. After this was shown to be the case, you kept
repeating this LIE. You LIED. You haven't admitted this or retracted your
libel. You have at least stopped repeating it, which is something. Not much,
but something.
You also stated that Bob Minton refused to return to Nigeria. I posted news
stories in which he clearly and unequivocally offered to return to Nigeria at
any time the Nigerian Senate has any questions for him. They don't, though they
certainly appear interested in the surviving relatives of Sani Abacha, who
pillaged and raped Nigeria's finances. Scientology's agent John Fashanu was a
willing patsy of Abacha, who had civil rights activist Ken Saro-Wiwa murdered,
and Fashanu was the front man for an effort to make him dictator for life. You
don't hear Scientology shrieking about the murders and other crimes of Abacha,
though they do shriek about Minton a lot. In either case, Minton is entirely
willing to return to Nigeria at any time to answer any questions. However, he's
already answered questions to everyone's satisfaction except that of a certain
criminally convicted nut-cult of which you are a member.
There. There are three specific examples you can chew on for a while.
Now come up with some specific examples of where I've been wrong, and point out
where and how I've been wrong and then prove it.
You can't. Because you are, once again, LYING. As usual.
ptsc
©Anti-Cult® - www.users.wineasy.se/noname/
In Message-ID: <8rlano$or9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
From: dors...@my-deja.com.
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy..
Wrote on the subject: Re: INVITATIONS TO HATE:
>In article
><b4eqts0d4knfa31fv...@ARSCC.Sweden.Dep.OSA.Surveillance>,
> ŠAnti-CultŽ - www.users.wineasy.se/noname/
><The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 05 Oct 2000 20:33:18 GMT.
>> In Message-ID: <8rioie$o43$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
>> From: dors...@my-deja.com.
>> Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy..
>> Wrote on the subject: Re: INVITATIONS TO HATE:
>>
>> >In article <20001005124101...@ng-fx1.aol.com>,
>> > deom...@aol.comgetlost (DeoMorto) wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >This post is for the reasonable men and women. For we can agree
>to
>> >> >disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
>> >when
>> >> >we are.
>> >>
>> >> have you ever made a post where you have admitted you were wrong?
>> >>
>> >> have you ever made a post where you admitted that the CofS had done
>> >anything
>> >> wrong?
>> >>
>> >> Your answer, I fear, supports your contention that only the truly
>> >insane can
>> >> never admit to a mistake.
>> >
>> >ONLY the social personality tries to correct their mistakes. The
>> >morally reprehensible and anti-social want to remain ignorant and
>thus
>> >cannot "see".
>> >
>> >Did that answer your question?
>> >
>> >Dorsai666
>> >
>>
>> I believe it's time to do a per Scientology policy investigation of
>YOUR
>> crimes Mr Dan Bryenton.
>
>
>>
>> I seldom fail to find the crimes of criminals....
>
>(should read) I seldom see the truth because of my crimes
>>
>> Sten-Arne
>
>
>
>Wow, another pawn in this game called hate. Could it get more personal?
>
>Come ahead little one... the prince of darkness awaits you (to all you
>paranoid buffs out there).
>
>Dorsai666
Hey Dan, your economical history seems a bit interesting to my
investigator. I bet this is going to be a very interesting investigation
:-)
Drop your crime cult association. In that way perhaps God will forgive
you for your lack of ethics...
PS. How many lives have you destroyed in the name of scientology?
Sten-Arne
dors...@my-deja.com
yduzit...@sympatico.ca wrote:
> dors...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Yduz,
> >
> > No. Unethical behavior is doing nothing while your friends, family
and
> > religion are attacked. The wrong thing to do is nothing. Always.
> >
>
> So we are being ethical then -we are not standing by while you and
your Cult
> attack Gregg and others simply because they have taken a stand
against the
> illegal, unethical and immoral practices of the COS. Thank - you
If you new for certain that you WERE wrong and that the information
you "knew" was false...what would that mean to you?
I don't fault fighting actual wrongs. I find fault however, in people
who have never been involved, making a pretense that they understand
something they know they do not, based on assertions from little data.
If one says that criminals are ignorant and stupid and that this is
truly what evil is...then stupidity and ignorance and remaining so,
would be criminal.
Illegal acts are censurable by law.
Unethical acts rest with the individual who knowingly goes against what
he knows and yet continues.
Immorality are acts that are "agreed" to and then violated by a group
member. Morals being the yardstick that society engenders or agree's
to.
None of these are attributes of scientologists or our practices. You
however, have no such luxury in your pursuit to denegrate us. Nor can
you say that you a part of this group, or ever have been. Thus you can
exercise illegal, immoral and unethical acts as you do not subscribe to
our tenets. We cannot.
Your participation in furthering hate is adequate proof of these
statements as they forward lies only.
Dorsai666
By the way, 3 more countries have recognized Scientology as a religion
in addition to the U.S. - fancy that eh?
Dorsai666
Tilman Hausherr
<br1utss052ugfb4as...@4ax.com>:
>That's like claiming that Sammy "the Bull" violating integrity by testifying
>against the Mafia, because he didn't have the "ethics" to remain a good Mafia
>criminal.
Idea - why not post an "SP Declare" of Sammy Gravano? It should use
actual scientology language, but mention "The Family".
Tilman
--
Tilman Hausherr [KoX, SP5.55] Entheta * Enturbulation * Entertainment
til...@berlin.snafu.de http://www.xenu.de
Resistance is futile. You will be enturbulated. Xenu always prevails.
Find broken links on your web site: http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/xenulink.html
The Xenu bookstore: http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/bookstore.html
Bern - http://welcome.to/ars
<8rne6p$9hq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>:
>By the way, 3 more countries have recognized Scientology as a religion
>in addition to the U.S. - fancy that eh?
I think I have heard of Italy, recently. Which were the other two?
_________________________
Bernie -- http://welcome.to/ars
dors...@my-deja.com
wel...@bernie.us-inc.com (Bern - http://welcome.to/ars) wrote:
> On Sat, 07 Oct 2000 15:07:07 GMT dors...@my-deja.com wrote in
> <8rne6p$9hq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>:
>
> >By the way, 3 more countries have recognized Scientology as a
religion
> >in addition to the U.S. - fancy that eh?
>
> I think I have heard of Italy, recently. Which were the other two?
What, another one!
Sweden, Mexico, South Africa.
>
> _________________________
> Bernie -- http://welcome.to/ars
>
Devoid
<dors...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8rl473$kbl$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <tc6D5.320938$1h3.7...@news20.bellglobal.com>,> news:8rioms$o7d$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > > In article <Rk3D5.295275$Gh.84...@news20.bellglobal.com>,
> > > "Devoid" <Dev...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > <dors...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8ri9d3
> > > $a7t$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> medical
> > > drug
> > > > > use to "temper" this same unreasonableness they not only
> conduct in
> agree to
> > > > > disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're
> wrong -
> > > when
> this
> > > > > forum is made up of...nothing more.
> > > > >
> > > > > Dorsai666
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > differences and similarities, Dan
> > > >
> > > > what was ron's definition of sanity again?
> > > >
> > > > nice Philisophical positioning thought.
> > > >
> > > > Devoid
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > You forgot identities.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Dorsai666> > Tech dic. Def. 6
> >
> > Devoid
>
>
>
>
> Devo,
>
> CS Series 22, page 2, large script.
>
> Dorsai666
Try first dynamic danger formula, Dan
Devoid
Captain Nerd
Hash: SHA1
In article <8rne6p$9hq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, dors...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Unethical acts rest with the individual who knowingly goes against what
> he knows and yet continues.
Why do you consider your attacks on Gregg's family to be ethical, and
attacks on your family to be unethical?
> Immorality are acts that are "agreed" to and then violated by a group
> member. Morals being the yardstick that society engenders or agree's
> to.
Why do you consider your attacks on Gregg's family to be moral, and
attacks on your family to be immoral?
Cap.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.2
iQA/AwUBOd+jGLztfgpKlX7qEQIecgCghi63Bv9/D+qOUHd9o+qSv8yrFqMAoLBI
dQecKbLzXKlVTdQsHtYVGYM0
=X8D4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Operation: Nerdwatch - http://www.nerdwatch.com
Captain Nerd can be reached at: cpt...@nerdwatch.com
"By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes."
dors...@my-deja.com
|-o-| wrote:
> On Fri, 06 Oct 2000 19:49:52 +0100, Roland
> <roland.rash...@virgin.net> wrote:
>
> >dors...@my-deja.com wrote:
Dear Roland,
Despite what everyone says about you...I still think you're cute.
Dorsai666
> >>
> >> In article <20001006025844...@ng-fj1.aol.com>,
> >> mistm...@aol.com (Mistmagoo55) wrote:
> >> > >Subject: INVITATIONS TO HATE
> >> > >From: dors...@my-deja.com
> >> > >Date: 10/5/00 12:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time
> >> > >Message-id: <8ri9d3$a7t$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
> >> > >
> >> Two months ago Tory, you had an opportunity to change a condition
if it
> >> were bad, but lacked the personal integrity to do so. If it was
wrong
> >> (whatever the situation) there was a way to handle it and you
didn't
> >> use any Tech to do so. Now all you do is justify how you didn't
handle
> >> it and disperse attention away from that failure.
> >>
> >> So, welcome to the little league...you're no longer a player in
> >> changing conditions, but a pawn in a minor game of hate.
> >>
> >> To these others you must appear great, after all you can agree
together.
> >> To me, you're an ex-scientologist in a lower condition who hasn't
the
> >> integrity to tell the "truth", let alone lecture about it.
> >>
> >> Do you think this forum is anything but one big reactive mind?
> >>
> >> Dorsai666
> >>
> >> Perhaps you should look at my post again...that's your new group.
> >
> >Yakakakaka!!
> >
> >Your name's out. Your address is out. The evil SP's are out there
> >Dorsai. They are hiding under the bushes waiting to pounce on you.
> >Christ - them freezoners and sending intention beams at your BT's to
get
> >them to cave you in. SP's have been sneeking round to your employer
and
> >giving them DA information. Go in on Monday and God but will you get
a
> >bad look. Have the SP's been able to implant the rats that are
creeping
> >up from your basement into and under the floorboards at this very
> >moment. Can't you hear those scratches with your theta hearing?
> >
> >Goddam SP's. Eeeeevil servants of the Psych Lords. They've come for
you,
> >Dorsai. Thev see you as a threat to their plans to take over the
galaxy.
> >They se you as a strong friend of LRH who they are afraid of and so
they
> >have come for you.
> >
> >Got to do something, Dorsai. Got to help LRH. Got to do the greatest
> >good for the greater number of dynamics. Got to not be afraid to hurt
> >another in a just cause. Got to strike a blow against the enemy. Got
to
> >dispose of quietly and without sorrow. Got to rid thois world of all
> >leprosy thought the simple expedient of disposing of all beggars. But
> >which Knight in Shining Armor is capable of this? Surely there is
none
> >so bold - so pur - so "ethical" ???
> >
> >There is?
> >
> >And it is YOU?
> >
> >
> >KILL, Dorsai.
> >
> >
> >KILL, KILL, KILL - for LRH - Mankind's Greatest Friend !!!!!
> >
> >
> >Roland
>
> And then some
dors...@my-deja.com
"Phineas Fogg" <lao...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> <dors...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8rl3qd$k1g$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > In article <20001006025844...@ng-fj1.aol.com>,
> > mistm...@aol.com (Mistmagoo55) wrote:
> > > >Subject: INVITATIONS TO HATE
> > > >From: dors...@my-deja.com
> > > >Date: 10/5/00 12:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time
> > > >Message-id: <8ri9d3$a7t$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
Dear Foggy,
On a clear day, you still won't be able to see forever...
Go back to sleep, wouldya?
Dorsai666
Podkayne1
> The fact is, we've not ever harmed you. By the same token, you villify
> and condemn us - publicly. Being critical has the connotation of the
> person being in disagreement and stating so...I got that. Bigotry is
> espousing falsehoods and half-truths in an attempt to win over people
> to a narrow-minded and prejudiced point of view. You haven't got that.
>
> You practice bigotry all the time. By definition. This doesn't upset
> you, you merely refute the truth of the definition and say it isn't so.
>
> Well, believe what you want to believe Kaeli, but I think your post
> says it all...have truths, lies and innuendo from a person on anti-
> depressents.
Point out *specific* lies you think Kaeli has made.
I can point out specific ones *you've* made, all I have to do is go to
Deja and enter "Nigeria extradition". Or any one where you accuse
someone of being a "criminal" - hint, they have to be convicted to be a
criminal.
--
John Travolta thinks Scientology is wonderful.
But then, he thinks the "Battlefield Earth" movie is wonderful too.
Think about it.
"You have angered the hedgehog, and now you must pay!"
John C. Randolph
dors...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> Think what you will, I'm an enemy to bigotry...not to you.
If you're an enemy to bigotry, then why are you a follower of that
racist, homophobic nutcase who founded your criminal nut-cult?
Ever read what elron had to say about Chinese people? Not *that* is bigotry.
-jcr
©Anti-Cult® - www.users.wineasy.se/noname/
In Message-ID: <8ro7ge$rru$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
From: dors...@my-deja.com.
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy..
Wrote on the subject: Re: INVITATIONS TO HATE:
>In article <39e0535d...@enews.newsguy.com>,
> wel...@bernie.us-inc.com (Bern - http://welcome.to/ars) wrote:
>> On Sat, 07 Oct 2000 15:07:07 GMT dors...@my-deja.com wrote in
>> <8rne6p$9hq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>:
>>
>> >By the way, 3 more countries have recognized Scientology as a
>religion
>> >in addition to the U.S. - fancy that eh?
>>
>> I think I have heard of Italy, recently. Which were the other two?
>
>
>What, another one!
>
>Sweden, Mexico, South Africa.
>
Sorry fucker. Sweden does not recognize or not recognize religions. The
only thing your crime cult did in Sweden, was to register as a community
of faith. the reason why cults can register like this, was that from Jan
1 this year, we separated the once state Church from the state.
Oh, the Church of Satan also registered BTW :-)
I just waited for you to come up with that lie. Your crime cult is NOT
recognized as a religion in Sweden. That's the simple and for you and
your crime syndicate, painful truth.
©Anti-Cult® - www.users.wineasy.se/noname/
article.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
On Fri, 06 Oct 2000 02:57:21 GMT.
In Message-ID: <lcbD5.3882$px1....@news20.bellglobal.com>
From: "AndroidCat www.xenu.net" <androi...@hotmail.com>.
Organization: ARSCC(wdne) Toronto Ilk Dirac Angestun Gespt.
Wrote on the subject: Re: INVITATIONS TO HATE:
>"©Anti-Cult® - www.users.wineasy.se/noname/"
><The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com> wrote in message
>news:b4eqts0d4knfa31fv...@ARSCC.Sweden.Dep.OSA.Surveillance...
>> On Thu, 05 Oct 2000 20:33:18 GMT.
>> In Message-ID: <8rioie$o43$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
>> From: dors...@my-deja.com.
>> Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy..
>> Wrote on the subject: Re: INVITATIONS TO HATE:
>>
>> >In article <20001005124101...@ng-fx1.aol.com>,
>> > deom...@aol.comgetlost (DeoMorto) wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >This post is for the reasonable men and women. For we can agree to
>> >> >disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
>> >when
>> >> >we are.
>> >>
>> >> have you ever made a post where you have admitted you were wrong?
>> >>
>> >> have you ever made a post where you admitted that the CofS had done
>> >anything
>> >> wrong?
>> >>
>> >> Your answer, I fear, supports your contention that only the truly
>> >insane can
>> >> never admit to a mistake.
>> >
>> >ONLY the social personality tries to correct their mistakes. The
>> >morally reprehensible and anti-social want to remain ignorant and thus
>> >cannot "see".
>> >
>> >Did that answer your question?
>> >
>> >Dorsai666
>> >
>>
>> I believe it's time to do a per Scientology policy investigation of YOUR
>> crimes Mr Dan Bryenton.
>>
>> I seldom fail to find the crimes of criminals....
>
>If you find anything which involves his family rather than himself, leave it
>out, please! (I spit on Dan's threats, but unlike Co$, we just don't do
>that!)
I do that, since each member supporting the crime syndicate, must learn
that he is responsible for the actions of the organization.
>
>And come to think of it, I'm not sure that I like the idea of poking into
>and posting his history. This isn't about Dan, this is about the criminal
>actions of $cientology, and their possible continuation to this day.
Without the support of the individual members, scientology wouldn't be
the crime syndicate it is today. That makes each member fully
responsible in my eyes.
>
>Ah well, do what thou wilt. (Like I can stop you? "Mush you little
>tabbies! Mush!")
>
>Ron, cohort of that ilk.
>
>
Sten-Arne, wondering if Brytech would like being implicated openly with
a crime syndicate?
---------------------------------------------------
Was canceled by the following rogue cancel message:
> Path: ...!194.213.69.151!news.algonet.se!algonet!f.de.uu.net!nr-do2.de.uu.net!businessnews.de.uu.net!not-for-mail
> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=A9Anti=2DCult=AE_=2D_www=2Eusers=2Ewineasy=2Ese=2Fnoname?=
> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=2F?= <The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com>
> Control: cancel <uugqts0ab1kkivoin...@ARSCC.Sweden.Dep.OSA.Surveillance>
> Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
> Subject: Cancel "Re: INVITATIONS TO HATE"
> Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 03:24:41 +1100
> Reply-To: The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com
> Message-ID: <8ijutsc6tr2pvahcg...@4ax.com>
> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548
> X-No-Archive: yes
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Lines: 1
> Organization: Customer of UUNET Deutschland GmbH
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.68.211.194
> X-Trace: businessnews.de.uu.net 970935884 4879 213.68.211.194
---------------------------------------------------------------
©Anti-Cult® - www.users.wineasy.se/noname/
article.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
In Message-ID: <8riod4$o1a$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
From: dors...@my-deja.com.
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy..
Wrote on the subject: Re: INVITATIONS TO HATE:
>In article <39dcc24d...@news.zoomnet.net>,
> tinmi...@hotmail.com (mimus) wrote:
>> dors...@my-deja.com posted:
>> >This post is for the reasonable men and women. For we can agree to
>> >disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
>when
>> >we are. The same cannot be said for the insane. THAT is what this
>> >forum is made up of...nothing more.
>>
>> Reasonableness is "out-ethics", innit?
>
>
>Clear your MisU. There is more than one defintion, though it's
>doubtful if you intended to "understand". It goes along with the self
>importance of "the not quite bright", remember?
>
>Dorsai666
>
>
Yeah well Dan Bryenton, your crimes against humanity and society is
about to be revealed....
Sten-Arne
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Was canceled by the following rogue cancel message:
> Path: ...!194.25.134.62!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!do.de.uu.net!nr-do2.de.uu.net!businessnews.de.uu.net!not-for-mail
> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=A9Anti=2DCult=AE_=2D_www=2Eusers=2Ewineasy=2Ese=2Fnoname?=
> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=2F?= <The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com>
> Control: cancel <q6eqtsgcve7l79hic...@ARSCC.Sweden.Dep.OSA.Surveillance>
> Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
> Subject: Cancel "Re: INVITATIONS TO HATE"
> Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 03:24:29 +1100
> Reply-To: The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com
> Message-ID: <rhjuts4cr8cu8ge6f...@4ax.com>
> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548
> X-No-Archive: yes
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Lines: 1
> Organization: Customer of UUNET Deutschland GmbH
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.68.211.194
> X-Trace: businessnews.de.uu.net 970935871 4879 213.68.211.194
------------------------------------------------------------------
©Anti-Cult® - www.users.wineasy.se/noname/
article.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy..
Wrote on the subject: Re: INVITATIONS TO HATE:
>In article
><b4eqts0d4knfa31fv...@ARSCC.Sweden.Dep.OSA.Surveillance>,
> ©Anti-Cult® - www.users.wineasy.se/noname/
><The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 05 Oct 2000 20:33:18 GMT.
>> In Message-ID: <8rioie$o43$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
>> From: dors...@my-deja.com.
>> Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy..
>> Wrote on the subject: Re: INVITATIONS TO HATE:
>>
>> >In article <20001005124101...@ng-fx1.aol.com>,
>> > deom...@aol.comgetlost (DeoMorto) wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >This post is for the reasonable men and women. For we can agree
>to
>> >> >disagree and also have the luxury and courage to say we're wrong -
>> >when
>> >> >we are.
>> >>
>> >> have you ever made a post where you have admitted you were wrong?
>> >>
>> >> have you ever made a post where you admitted that the CofS had done
>> >anything
>> >> wrong?
>> >>
>> >> Your answer, I fear, supports your contention that only the truly
>> >insane can
>> >> never admit to a mistake.
>> >
>> >ONLY the social personality tries to correct their mistakes. The
>> >morally reprehensible and anti-social want to remain ignorant and
>thus
>> >cannot "see".
>> >
>> >Did that answer your question?
>> >
>> >Dorsai666
>> >
>>
>> I believe it's time to do a per Scientology policy investigation of
>YOUR
>> crimes Mr Dan Bryenton.
>
>
>>
>> I seldom fail to find the crimes of criminals....
>
>(should read) I seldom see the truth because of my crimes
>>
>> Sten-Arne
>
>
>
>Wow, another pawn in this game called hate. Could it get more personal?
>
>Come ahead little one... the prince of darkness awaits you (to all you
>paranoid buffs out there).
>
>Dorsai666
Hey Dan, your economical history seems a bit interesting to my
investigator. I bet this is going to be a very interesting investigation
:-)
Drop your crime cult association. In that way perhaps God will forgive
you for your lack of ethics...
PS. How many lives have you destroyed in the name of scientology?
Sten-Arne
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Was canceled by the following rogue cancel message:
> Path: ...!194.25.134.62!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!do.de.uu.net!nr-do2.de.uu.net!businessnews.de.uu.net!not-for-mail
> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=A9Anti=2DCult=AE_=2D_www=2Eusers=2Ewineasy=2Ese=2Fnoname?=
> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=2F?= <The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com>
> Control: cancel <64cutss3uegto89s5...@ARSCC.Sweden.Dep.OSA.Surveillance>
> Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
> Subject: Cancel "Re: INVITATIONS TO GET ETHICAL, DAN BRYENTON"
> Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 03:25:19 +1100
> Reply-To: The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com
> Message-ID: <ejjutsgic1le2eil4...@4ax.com>
> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548
> X-No-Archive: yes
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Lines: 1
> Organization: Customer of UUNET Deutschland GmbH
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.68.211.194
> X-Trace: businessnews.de.uu.net 970935921 4879 213.68.211.194