On Apr 5, 1:05 pm, alex <alexrsi...@notmail.comdamnspam> wrote:

Alex, I have done my best to be open and fair with you both on here
and in private email.

But consider this my last response to what you post about me and my
intentions on here. Feel free to privately email again if you want.

I find it very interesting that the more I say I am focusing on DM and
not others, the more you step up your little "attack" and crazy
evaluation.

I particularly note how you forward the "church" line of trying to
make people fearful of speaking out. Do you get a "stat" each time you
mention that?

If you want to do something different than I do, please free free to
just go ahead and do what you got to do.

I'm not going to justify anything else to you. But in the interest of
being clear, I will post here a few parts of my reply to you in our
private emails. I know it's been over 20 days and you have not replied
to me. I am not quoting your email as you sent it to me privately.
Hopefully my private notes to you listed below will still make some
sense without showing what you said.

If you would prefer, I give you permission to publish both our emails
on here. I'd also be glad to do so if you are ok on it.

You know who I am but you still hide. Fair enough, your choice but it
does give you a heck of a lot less credibility.  Here's the parts from
my email to you in the event it helps refresh your memory:

"I appreciate that that has meaning to you. It actually doesn't matter
to me. I am not pondering on such. I know people who loved LRH and
people who hate him. I am positive he had good and bad sides. In one
XSO post I call him, like us all, "a walking contradicition, partly
truth and partly fiction" in poetically taking from an old country
song. lol The difference between him and most of us as we seek
something better is that I and people I know did not ALSO abuse others
who thought differently than us. We did not lie, committ fraud and
such. These are things that I hope are dealt with the most. Yes LRH is
dead but those carrying out his old policies who use them to lie,
abuse and the like need to be dealt with and, to understand that, ones
needs some understanding of that part of LRH"..........

"Your premise assumes that only it's "misapplication" can cause
damage. For one thing, I really don't believe that and for another, I
think it's just too easy to rationalize every abuse by saying a great
technology was "misapplied" every time there was a bad result. Hubbard
was a mess before he died. In his last years there were many examples
of "insane" actions by him. While I respect that no one is perfect and
while I respect his right to believe in what he believed, he is no
example at all to me as someone who had a workable tech and wonderful
answer for all. I'm not sure he had that even for himself. That said,
I respect differing views. Also, I simply posted the fact that Factnet
was doing a criminal investigation. This was so that people who wanted
to be part of it could. I neither recommended it, nor advised against
it. More and more people are coming to me know that know of many lies,
even crimes as far as I know. It's amazing how they were afraid to
speak out. Well, as one judge said "sunshine disinfects" so let the
truth win out. For one thing, I don't believe in the part of the
investigation surrounding scientology's attorneys. I also am not
personally focused on the section with which you had concerns. But I
am aware of other parts of their investigation that I support and feel
is important. Simple as that".........

"Alex, I can understand how you and others can feel this way. But my
friend countless people who do horrible things where they think they
are "above the law" and then justify it based on their religious
beliefs or whatever. And Hubbard is an example of one of them. He
abused many people, lied repeatedly, sought the destruction of all who
oppose his will, took money by threat, fraud and deception and much
more. If the government said you can not love your children, I would
respect everyone who loved their children in spite of it. I'm not
saying "government" is always right. Nor do I think that. One can get
into subjective arguments on this topic forever. Bottom line for me is
that Hubbard WAY overstepped any "poetic license" to do what is right
despite governement or anything like that. It's very clear and simple
to me"..........

"Again, I consider that a rationalization under some banner like "the
greatest good". That is so very subjective, prone to error and used
all too often in scientiology to harm and destroy others. What is in
front of us are very specific actions of greed, crime and the like. I
am just addressing some of them. That the organizations of scientology
will suffer or that perhaps the practice of same might suffer as
abuses and crimes are exposed ought to be blamed on those doing the
misdeeds, not the ones exposing same. Will Miscavige drag down the
church to protect himself. I don't know, I would guess he probably
will"........

"Sorry Alex, I am saying facts about horrible abuses and such that I
know. Simple as that. What a sweeping, general term is "larger context
perspectives"! ......I respect your feelings and rights to same. And,
thank you for sharing that with me. I hope that those who find gain in
the practice of the non abusive parts of scientology truly find
happiness and spiritual enlightenment. I know of people who would like
to help it do so when abuses and lies and such are stopped. Good for
them. I support that. Just don't try to force it on me or others who
do not want it as if somehow you hold some larger perspective or
truth. For me, and many others, you don't".......

"I certainly hope so Alex. And I wish anyone of good heart trying to
reform it good luck......You certainly have a right to your own views
and you know far better than I what helps you. So I wish you well on
any peaceful and non abusive journey you may take towards personal
spiritual enlightenment.......Take care Alex, Larry"

So, which of us do you suppose is operating in the open and in good
faith Alex?

SME