Is Dennis Erlich allowed to say.....
RolandRB
Enquiring minds want to know.
Roland
cultxpt
Why would that matter?
Tilman Hausherr
wrote:
http://www.informer.org/
"InFormer Ministry is a volunteer, non-sectarian religious order. It was
established to educate the public about dangerous cults, and to assist
ex-members, their families and those recovering from involvement with
fanatical groups. We give guidance and support to individuals attempting
to integrate back into society after having been divorced from reality
as a result of participation in such groups."
Lets say that someone is in scientology and contacts Erlich. He should
know whether Erlich is allowed to speak freely, or whether he is bound
by some restriction.
Tilman
--
Tilman Hausherr [KoX, SP5.55] Entheta * Enturbulation * Entertainment
http://www.xenu.de
Resistance is futile. You will be enturbulated. Xenu always prevails.
Find broken links on your web site: http://home.snafu.de/tilman/xenulink.html
The Xenu bookstore: http://home.snafu.de/tilman/bookstore.html
RolandRB
> On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 07:37:25 -0800 (PST), cultxpt <cult...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Dec 30, 8:24 am, RolandRB <rolandbe...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> Is Dennis Erlich allowed to say that Scientology is a harmful cult?
>
> >> Enquiring minds want to know.
>
> >> Roland
>
> >Why would that matter?
>
> http://www.informer.org/
> "InFormer Ministry is a volunteer, non-sectarian religious order. It was
> established to educate the public about dangerous cults, and to assist
> ex-members, their families and those recovering from involvement with
> fanatical groups. We give guidance and support to individuals attempting
> to integrate back into society after having been divorced from reality
> as a result of participation in such groups."
>
> Lets say that someone is in scientology and contacts Erlich. He should
> know whether Erlich is allowed to speak freely, or whether he is bound
> by some restriction.
>
> Tilman
Exactement, mon ami!
cultxpt
> On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 07:37:25 -0800 (PST), cultxpt <cult...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Dec 30, 8:24 am, RolandRB <rolandbe...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> Is Dennis Erlich allowed to say that Scientology is a harmful cult?
>
> >> Enquiring minds want to know.
>
> >> Roland
>
> >Why would that matter?
>
> http://www.informer.org/
> "InFormer Ministry is a volunteer, non-sectarian religious order. It was
> established to educate the public about dangerous cults, and to assist
> ex-members, their families and those recovering from involvement with
> fanatical groups. We give guidance and support to individuals attempting
> to integrate back into society after having been divorced from reality
> as a result of participation in such groups."
>
> Lets say that someone is in scientology and contacts Erlich. He should
> know whether Erlich is allowed to speak freely, or whether he is bound
> by some restriction.
>
> Tilman
>
> --
>
> Resistance is futile. You will be enturbulated. Xenu always prevails.
>
> Find broken links on your web site: http://home.snafu.de/tilman/xenulink.html
> The Xenu bookstore: http://home.snafu.de/tilman/bookstore.html
Ok, I'm not gonna get sucked into an endless argument here. Suffice it
to say, you don't trust Dennis to tell someone in that situation
whether he's restricted in what he can say. I trust him.
Android Cat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shibboleth
The vain hope that there is some word or phrase that someone acting for
Scientology can't repeat. Short of getting a Lensman-style lens from the
ARiSians, I don't think that's going to happen.
"Also, there was the apparently insuperable difficulty of the identification
of authorized personnel. Triplanetary's best scientists had done their best
in the way of a noncounterfeitable badge-the historic Golden Meteor, which
upon touch impressed upon the toucher's consciousness an unpronounceable,
unspellable symbol-but that best was not enough. What physical science could
devise and synthesize, physical science could analyze and duplicate; and
that analysis and duplication had caused trouble indeed."
Mind you, some traces of CoS's old problems with the word X*NU crop up now
and then. At least twice, Wikipedia edits by CoS editors have mangled links
to xenu.net. From the look of it (coming out *INVALID*.net), it was
accidently done by an automatic filter rather than by hand, so they might
still have some sort of Scieno Sitter running on the INCOMM PCs that has to
be switched off when pretending to be their current Wikipedia sock-puppet.
--
Ron of that ilk.
Davie is an angry dwarf.
Skipper
<5b7aaa8e-da4d-4e5f...@1g2000hsl.googlegroups.com>,
RolandRB <rolan...@hotmail.com> wrote:
My guess is he could take some of that money, find a very good DC law
firm, and go after the cult for abridging his first amendment rights,
but maybe he hasn't thought of that.
Patty Pieniadz
"Tilman Hausherr" <tilman...@snafu.de> wrote in message
news:hfffn35c34nntrfcd...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 07:37:25 -0800 (PST), cultxpt <cul...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On Dec 30, 8:24 am, RolandRB <rolandbe...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Is Dennis Erlich allowed to say that Scientology is a harmful cult?
>>>
>>> Enquiring minds want to know.
>>>
>>> Roland
>>
>>Why would that matter?
>
> http://www.informer.org/
> "InFormer Ministry is a volunteer, non-sectarian religious order. It
> was
> established to educate the public about dangerous cults, and to assist
> ex-members, their families and those recovering from involvement with
> fanatical groups. We give guidance and support to individuals
> attempting
> to integrate back into society after having been divorced from reality
> as a result of participation in such groups."
>
>
> Lets say that someone is in scientology and contacts Erlich. He should
> know whether Erlich is allowed to speak freely, or whether he is bound
> by some restriction.
>
> Tilman
I spoke with Dennis on many occasions and found him to be
extremely helpful to me. I did not find him "bound by some
restriction".
If Scn has some half assed "restriction" as part of Dennis'
settlement and Dennis can effectively get around it by talking
about cults in general and counselling all types of Ex's including
Ex-Scn, then I say GOOD ON HIM.
Tilman, I don't know exactly what is going on with you and Dennis
but it seems that you are pissed off with him for "settling" and
getting some money for it.
Scn ruined this guy's life. Not only while he was IN, but after he
got out and started talking about it. Scn went after him with
everything they had and tried to destroy him.
If it turned out that the best thing for him to do was settle
get some money and just STFU then MORE POWER TO
HIM.
He is one of the first few that courageously stood up to the
cult and told them to go fuck themselves, and for his
efforts they worked 24/7 to try to destroy him. He settled
but he's always been around. He's always been available
to talk to and to get help from.
I'm glad he's back here on ars. I was pleasantly surprised
to see him posting on ESMB, and challenging some of
the people over there that were still very much in the cult
mind set. Some people don't like to be challenged.
Now he's here. He's a good resource. He can only
up the level of criticism on this daffy newsgroup.
If you can't stand him, then fine. But please don't smear
him with things you've "heard". You are way better than that.
You are usually a "facts" kind of guy. So if you have something
to say. Let's hear the facts and stop the slime.
Patty
henri
>> Roland
Considering that this was among Erlich's counterclaims in the original
case, it would take poor RTC lawyers indeed to settle and leave him free to
relitigate the issue. Scientology's lawyers have certainly made errors
in the past. Missing a possible cause of action is not, however, the
sort of error they make.
roger gonnet
news:301220070844081039%dadw...@gmail.not...
That's what Gerry did, and he did never succeed about this: most evidently
for foreign people like me, justice is'nt more perfect in USA than
elsewhere, and the worse exemple comes from Clinton as from Bush, who both
have walked over the 1st Amendment with their laws and decisions regarding
"religious issues" and "'religion using tax money". Why would small judges
from small districts be more royalist than the Kings?
r
Skipper
<ppie...@gmail.com> wrote:
I agree. If he's going after the cult in any way, good for him. He's
already BEAT THEIR ASS.
So anything else is just gravy.
Magoo
"Patty Pieniadz" <ppie...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5tq14iF...@mid.individual.net...
I agree: Well said.
The man did what he needed to do, and he's been a huge asset
to many who have left C of S, as well as critics.
Whatever your personal deal is with him, e-mail him. I'm sure he'd be happy
to answer you, or not. Either way, it's a personal issue. Please keep it so,
and stick to what you do best, which IS finding FACTS and posting them, not
questioning a group about another critic's personal life and decisions.
Happy New Year to ALL :)
Tory/Magoo~~~
Ted Mayett
If you really wanted to know. REALLY wanted to know, you would open
some hotmail or yahoo type account and email a question or two. And
then you could post the results here. But you don't really want to
know, all you want to do is to flap your lips.
--
Ted Mayett
Critical information regarding Scientology:
http://www.solitarytrees.net
Ted Mayett
<tilman...@snafu.de> wrote:
>Lets say that someone is in scientology and contacts Erlich. He should
>know whether Erlich is allowed to speak freely, or whether he is bound
>by some restriction.
>
>Tilman
Your humor is too subtle Tilman, they won't understand.
consensu...@gmail.com
RolandRB
<ars.to.tedmay...@XXmmXXspamgourmet.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 07:24:11 -0800 (PST), RolandRB
>
> >Is Dennis Erlich allowed to say that Scientology is a harmful cult?
>
> >Enquiring minds want to know.
>
> >Roland
>
> If you really wanted to know. REALLY wanted to know, you would open
> some hotmail or yahoo type account and email a question or two. And
> then you could post the results here. But you don't really want to
> know, all you want to do is to flap your lips.
If somebody could do this and report back it would be great. I'd do it
myself but I wouldn't be able to stop myself laughing.
Rev Dennis L Erlich
Dennis
Rev Dennis L Erlich
>Lets say that someone is in scientology and contacts Erlich. He should
>know whether Erlich is allowed to speak freely, or whether he is bound
>by some restriction.
I'm done "force-feeding people data" Tilman. The only restriction is
my own common sense and desire to allow ex cultists (and others) to
make up their own minds.
I help people *educate themselves* about cults and determine to their
own satisfaction whether they are involved (or want to become
involved) in any groups.
Dennis
------------------
"And here I sit so patiently,
Waiting to find out what price
You have to pay to get out of
Going though all these things twice." - B Dylan
Rev Dennis L Erlich
>Ok, I'm not gonna get sucked into an endless argument here. Suffice it
>to say, you don't trust Dennis to tell someone in that situation
>whether he's restricted in what he can say. I trust him.
Thanks, Jeff. But arguing with a sh*t-flinger like Tilman is
pointless. He's using his patented Fascist Interrogation Techniques.
Accuse the suspect of all kinds of shit and then wait til he trips up
defending himself against the lies. Just like a cultist.
Dennis
Rev Dennis L Erlich
>I spoke with Dennis on many occasions and found him to be
>extremely helpful to me. I did not find him "bound by some
>restriction".
My ministerial consultations are privileged and under California Law
both parties must give permission for any court to be able to subpoena
records (not that any exist) or demand testimony about the exchanges I
have related to my ministry.
>If Scn has some half assed "restriction" as part of Dennis'
>settlement and Dennis can effectively get around it by talking
>about cults in general and counselling all types of Ex's including
>Ex-Scn, then I say GOOD ON HIM.
Phew.
>Tilman, I don't know exactly what is going on with you and Dennis
>but it seems that you are pissed off with him for "settling" and
>getting some money for it.
He wanted me to "fight to the death" ... even if that meant not taking
a victory as sufficient accomplishment.
>Scn ruined this guy's life. Not only while he was IN, but after he
>got out and started talking about it. Scn went after him with
>everything they had and tried to destroy him.
>
>If it turned out that the best thing for him to do was settle
>get some money and just STFU then MORE POWER TO
>HIM.
>
>He is one of the first few that courageously stood up to the
>cult and told them to go fuck themselves, and for his
>efforts they worked 24/7 to try to destroy him. He settled
>but he's always been around. He's always been available
>to talk to and to get help from.
Yes.
>I'm glad he's back here on ars. I was pleasantly surprised
>to see him posting on ESMB, and challenging some of
>the people over there that were still very much in the cult
>mind set. Some people don't like to be challenged.
Tilman needs to protect his turf here. Doesn't want me back. Boohoo.
>Now he's here. He's a good resource. He can only
>up the level of criticism on this daffy newsgroup.
Yah it's time to bring this old bus in for clean-up, service and
refurbishing.
>If you can't stand him, then fine. But please don't smear
>him with things you've "heard". You are way better than that.
That remains to be seen.
>You are usually a "facts" kind of guy. So if you have something
>to say. Let's hear the facts and stop the slime.
What a concept. Thanks, pooks.
Rev Dennis L Erlich
>I agree. If he's going after the cult in any way, good for him. He's
>already BEAT THEIR ASS.
I didn't beat anyone, Skip. I just set my Tarbaby in da road an'
guess who come along an' got stuck.
"Oh please don't throw me in dat briar-patch!"
>So anything else is just gravy.
Yah. The stuffing is a bit too dry. Allow me to pour s'more on.
Dennis
Rev Dennis L Erlich
>The man did what he needed to do, and he's been a huge asset
>to many who have left C of S, as well as critics.
Thanks for noticing.
>Whatever your personal deal is with him, e-mail him. I'm sure he'd be happy
>to answer you, or not.
NOT! Once bitten ...
>Either way, it's a personal issue. Please keep it so,
>and stick to what you do best, which IS finding FACTS and posting them, not
>questioning a group about another critic's personal life and decisions.
I think he's studying to be a proctologist.
Dennis
Rev Dennis L Erlich
>>Lets say that someone is in scientology and contacts Erlich. He should
>>know whether Erlich is allowed to speak freely, or whether he is bound
>>by some restriction.
>
>Your humor is too subtle Tilman, they won't understand.
There's nothing subtle or funny about this. You think so, I think
you're seriously f*cked up, Ted
The work I have done for many years has been strenuous, costly and
obviously effective. Tilman's stink-putting on my ministry is just
another sign of his fanaticism.
Dennis
Rev Dennis L Erlich
>My guess is he could take some of that money, find a very good DC law
>firm, and go after the cult for abridging his first amendment rights,
>but maybe he hasn't thought of that.
No, Skip. Hostilities ended in 1999. The matter is closed.
Unless there is any continuing harassment, the statute of limitations
has passed.
If anyone wants the case reopened, that's not my concern. I have
never filed suit against anyone in my life. And I have no intention
of doing so or re-engaging in the future.
Dennis
Rev Dennis L Erlich
>If you really wanted to know. REALLY wanted to know, you would open
>some hotmail or yahoo type account and email a question or two. And
>then you could post the results here.
Yah, great sliemy suggestion, Ted. Call me up and lie to me and see
what you get for answers. Maybe you can entrap me into something.
I think you've lived in Sin City too long.
Dennis
John Law Dogberry
<info...@informer.org> wrote:
>Ted Mayett <ars.to.t...@XXmmXXspamgourmet.com> wrote:
>
>>>Lets say that someone is in scientology and contacts Erlich. He should
>>>know whether Erlich is allowed to speak freely, or whether he is bound
>>>by some restriction.
>>
>>Your humor is too subtle Tilman, they won't understand.
>
>There's nothing subtle or funny about this. You think so, I think
>you're seriously f*cked up, Ted
>
*You* are so over the top on 'personal' braggadocio of self importance
since your <ahem> 'return' to ARS no matter your <ahem> 'history' as a
meat wagon target for OSA forces it paints you as character pathetic.
Speaking for many who can see what you're doing but either don't care
to respond for fear of thread retribution or not caring in general
which I can fully understand, Go fuck yourself, asshole. Seriously:
Fuck off *and* die -- dickweed, and take your now ancient 'litigation'
wars with you.
>The work I have done for many years has been strenuous, costly and
>obviously effective.
Ibid. Bow down to "Mr. Einstein" of Scientology criticism in his above
statement who hasn't posted squat on the ARS board for years but
claims "strenuous" "costly" and "obviously effective" biceps as a
credo to his dead Ego needing a massage.
>Tilman's stink-putting on my ministry is just
>another sign of his fanaticism.
My ministry? Did I hear you right with "My Ministry" if quoting you
correctly which I am? Go fuck yourself with your 'ministry', asshole.
No *ministry* of *any* kind allowed in these parts, dickwad!
>
>Dennis
As in 'The Menace' even if Tilman from time to time is known to be an
introverted nutcase but not in general unlike interlopers from past
years trying to curry 'credibility favors' as some sort of critic
Godzilla 'from afar' who in fact is tearing up bandwidth as 'song' to
his Ego because, well, he "feels like it", as some sort of ARS birth
right. You are *WAY* out of the ARS *time stream*, pal! You're just
another meat body on the board, nothing more, AND, nothing less, so
welcome aboard that includes *all* anons which ARS asshole regulars
deplore because of their pathetic Egos feeling 'challenged'. If you
think I'm just trying to denigrate 'your highness'' by making those
statements, fuck you! Really. Fuck You! If you don't care, which I
suspect, again, fuck you! As in, fuck you!
Take your past litigation trials with tribulations as 'credibility
papers' to "muscle" ARS with and please shove it up your fat trailer
trash ass.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humility
snip>
Humility is a quality or characteristic ascribed to a person who is
considered to be humble. "Humility is derived from the Latin word
"humilis", which means low, humble, from earth. A humble person is
generally thought to be unpretentious and modest: someone who does not
think that he or she is better or more important than others."
Take a lesson from that definition of 'Humble'; asshole. That's if you
can!
John Law Dogberry
[barbara schwarz's favorite on her 'downtone' list. The truth is; she
just thinks I'm sexy, and she's right on that *one* score.]
//
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Quaoar
> Is Dennis Erlich allowed to say that Scientology is a harmful cult?
>
> Enquiring minds want to know.
>
> Roland
Erlich is allowed to say whatever the hell he wants to say, irrespective
of any putative agreements he might have with whomever and irrespective
of the "demands" of the public at large. Erlich, like any other person,
has the right of personal choice in his communications. Those that have
problems with this thesis should pound sand. ...deeply.
Q
Muldoon
Has something been said?
The message, at first, was that 'Ex Scientologist Message Board' is a
cult or cult-like and, then, that a.r.s. has become a cult or is cult-
like, etc., and there's been lots of name calling and general flaming
- but what exactly - about the Destructive Cult of Scientlogy - has
been said?
Maybe, now, something, on the topic of this NG - L. Ron Hubbard's
'Church' of Scientology - can be said.
It would be a nice change of pace.
Hephaestus
> Is Dennis Erlich allowed to say that Scientology is a harmful cult?
>
> Enquiring minds want to know.
>
> Roland
WTF?
Yeah, he is.
Ted Mayett
<info...@informer.org> wrote:
>The work I have done for many years has been strenuous, costly and
>obviously effective. Tilman's stink-putting on my ministry is just
>another sign of his fanaticism.
>
>Dennis
There is nothing nice about verbal tech.
Ted Mayett
If I had any interest in this I would have done it already, have
called and lied to see what the answers are. But then I've called a
number of 'help for ex-cultists groups' over the years to see if they
are scams. And I lie every time when I call in.
By way of education if you do call in to something to see if it is
legitimate, you have to lie. But you have to do it well. It has to
flow from your lips. Ooze across the phone line with no effort
whatsoever. You have to sound totally sincere, but you cannot sound
sincere because they can pick that up. If something is a scam they
have radar in place, and you have to get past that radar. You have to
get under that radar, over it, through it, past it, whatever it takes
you have to circumvent the radar. And when it comes to lying on a
phone or through email to unearth a possible scam, I am the best you
will ever come across. I'm a natural.
Two 'get your money back from scientology' things that I know have
come through this ng over the years. I called into both of them and
was happy they were legit. I've called into factnet, the lmt, called
more things and people around the world then I can even remember.
Because anything advertised on this ng had better be legitimate or I
will find the scam and post.
Maybe I have been in sin city too long.
Tilman Hausherr
<bria...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>On Dec 31, 3:48 pm, Quaoar <qua...@marcabfleet.net> wrote:
>> RolandRB wrote:
>> > Is Dennis Erlich allowed to say that Scientology is a harmful cult?
>>
>> > Enquiring minds want to know.
>>
>> > Roland
>>
>> Erlich is allowed to say whatever the hell he wants to say, irrespective
>> of any putative agreements he might have with whomever and irrespective
>> of the "demands" of the public at large. Erlich, like any other person,
>> has the right of personal choice in his communications. Those that have
>> problems with this thesis should pound sand. ...deeply.
>>
>> Q
>
>Has something been said?
>
>The message, at first, was that 'Ex Scientologist Message Board' is a
>cult or cult-like and, then, that a.r.s. has become a cult or is cult-
>like, etc., and there's been lots of name calling and general flaming
>- but what exactly - about the Destructive Cult of Scientlogy - has
>been said?
Dennis can say that the "Ex Scientologist Message Board" is a cult.
Dennis cannot say that scientology is a cult.
Tilman
>
>Maybe, now, something, on the topic of this NG - L. Ron Hubbard's
>'Church' of Scientology - can be said.
>
>It would be a nice change of pace.
>
>
--
Tilman Hausherr
<info...@informer.org> wrote:
>Tilman Hausherr <tilman...@snafu.de> wrote:
>
>>Lets say that someone is in scientology and contacts Erlich. He should
>>know whether Erlich is allowed to speak freely, or whether he is bound
>>by some restriction.
>
>I'm done "force-feeding people data" Tilman. The only restriction is
>my own common sense and desire to allow ex cultists (and others) to
>make up their own minds.
>
>I help people *educate themselves* about cults and determine to their
>own satisfaction whether they are involved (or want to become
>involved) in any groups.
Sounds like when someone asks you (as I did here 1-2 days ago, and
Roland did in the original message) whether scientology is a cult, you
won't give an answer. Which you now characterize as "force-feeding
people data". That, obviously, is a result of a restriction. (Unless, of
course, you don't know what scientology is, or what a cult is :-)) Of
course, your side is that the reason is that this decision not to answer
is purely your own.
Anyway, I think all has been said about that topic. Your non-answers are
similarly evasive than when a journalist asks a scientologist about
Xenu.
Tilman
Tilman Hausherr
<info...@informer.org> wrote:
>If anyone wants the case reopened, that's not my concern. I have
>never filed suit against anyone in my life.
And I thought that there had been a counter-suit because of the illegal
search-and-seizure. Maybe that was in an alternate universe. The one in
which you had also said:
I'm sure the cult doesn't have enough money to get me to back
off. I certainly am not going to enter into any agreement with
the sliem [sic] or go for a gag.
and
Of course, once the suit is settled, and I collect from the
cult, the ministry will be looking at how to pay back the
donations in some way, set up a non-profit internet service
provider, and establish a half-way house for people coming out
of cults to make the transition back into society.
RolandRB
wrote:
> I'm "allowed" to say anything I want, Ro. This is still America.
>
> Dennis
Then, dear Dennis, if your experience is that Scientology is a
dangerous cult then feel free to post here that "Scientology is a
dangerous cult". If, on the other hand, you do not feel it to be a
dangerous cult or, shudder to think, you are covered by a gagging
order on this matter, then feel free to treat us to your silence.
Rev Dennis L Erlich
>Dennis can say that the "Ex Scientologist Message Board" is a cult.
Go ahead, *sshole. Twist my words anyway you want.
------------------------
But really Reader,
It's flattering to see young Tilly parsing my every word thoroughly
enough to find what he thinks is a contradiction. And then he even
has to twist what I said to make his illogic connect. It's laughable,
really. Pitifully petty. But how convenient for him to have the
thousands and thousands of posts I have made under my own name all
these years to dig through.
And to prove what? That I am a flawed human being who cannot quite
live up to his bluster? That I vainly want to maintain what little I
have left of my privacy? That I don't respond well to someone
flinging sh*tty lies and innuendos at me? All the above and more
flaws? I admit it. OK.
I fold like a lawnchair under pressure. I took everyone's hopes and
dreams for a brave new world, right down the drain with me. Now just
look at this place. Thanks God we have Tils to ferret out my flaws
lest anyone think I am the Ubermench I falsely claimed to be. Sorry I
let you all down. As one invalidated moderator put it: "Sorry I have
a life."
But not really. I don't think anyone should be let down by my
actions. I made scrupulous effort not to screw over anyone no matter
who pressured me to. I did the same while in a cult. If anyone is
disappointed in me, the original expectations were too high. They
should find another Superhero to die a glorious death for them.
As far as the subject of scientology, my words are all over the
internet. And although I see it doesn't bother Tully to repeat
himself, over and over, I prefer not to.
But I will just for you. I've said it over and over ... I could if I
wanted.
And again just for Tilly, I will repeat myself once more. STFU you
fascist dweeb.
henri
wrote:
>Dennis can say that the "Ex Scientologist Message Board" is a cult.
He never said that. You're just lying again.
RolandRB
But your postings on this matter are a thing of the past. What if
somebody approaches your "ministry" today and expresses their concern
about a family member caught up in Scientology? Do you, today, tell
them that Scientology is a dangerous cult?
> But I will just for you. I've said it over and over ... I could if I
> wanted.
>
> And again just for Tilly, I will repeat myself once more. STFU you
> fascist dweeb.
So far I see you as being evasive but you have a chance here to prove
otherwise and I hope you do.
Rev Dennis L Erlich
>But your postings on this matter are a thing of the past. What if
>somebody approaches your "ministry" today and expresses their concern
>about a family member caught up in Scientology? Do you, today, tell
>them that Scientology is a dangerous cult?
Nope. I listen to what they have to say. I let them voice their
personal concerns. I advise them how to deal with interpersonal and
real-life problems. Such consultations are private, confidential and
fully privileged under California law.
As far as whether one group or another is a cult, I point them toward
material that will help them decide such questions for themselves. I
help them learn how to find out for themselves.
My general advice about cults is freely given and, as well as a
recovery booklist, is up on my website www.informer.org
Dennis
RolandRB
That's very interesting Dennis, and thank you for that. What I puzzle
about is why a concerned family member is not able to benefit from
your own experiences with a particular religious group, namely
Scientology. From what you have experienced with this particular
religious group, are you not able to say up front or, do you not feel
inclined to say up front, that this is a dangerous religious group?
Warrior
>>
>>Dennis can say that the "Ex Scientologist Message Board" is a cult.
In article <dg1ln3ppfjio99c95...@4ax.com>, henri says:
>
>He never said that. You're just lying again.
It looks to me like Tilman wrote "can say", meaning "is able to
say" that the ESMB is a cult. And since Dennis himself said he
retains his freedom of speech rights, Tilman didn't lie.
Warrior - Sunshine disinfects
"Scientology: it's about deception."
http://warrior.xenu.ca
Rev Dennis L Erlich
post.
d
Tilman Hausherr
You're playing with words, in your amateurish attempt to do PR for him.
Message-ID: <24lql3d85dl1ofgs4...@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <ad88m35kqscgig7jm...@4ax.com>
henri
wrote:
>On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 13:28:07 -0500, henri <he...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 17:38:52 +0100, Tilman Hausherr <tilman...@snafu.de>
>>wrote:
>>>Dennis can say that the "Ex Scientologist Message Board" is a cult.
>>He never said that. You're just lying again.
>You're playing with words, in your amateurish attempt to do PR for him.
Don't tell me what the fuck I'm doing, you fascist scum. I'm stating my
disagreement with your disgusting behavior.
If I were doing PR, I would withhold calling you the piece of shit you are,
and instead be "polite" about my disagreement. You dumb motherfucker.
"PR" that, you lying turd.
Tilman Hausherr
<info...@informer.org> wrote:
>It's flattering to see young Tilly parsing my every word thoroughly
>enough to find what he thinks is a contradiction.
And there are several. Like claiming that there is nothing except the
court order, then claiming that there is the public settlement, and the
"rest" is private. Or claiming that you don't live in Palm Springs (you
said it was part of the "100% lies" by me), while your own website gives
out Palm Springs as your address.
>And then he even
>has to twist what I said to make his illogic connect. It's laughable,
>really. Pitifully petty. But how convenient for him to have the
>thousands and thousands of posts I have made under my own name all
>these years to dig through.
>
>And to prove what? That I am a flawed human being who cannot quite
>live up to his bluster? That I vainly want to maintain what little I
>have left of my privacy?
How is this a "privacy" problem, if you (sometimes only) claim that
there is nothing else re: settlement except what is public? You can't
have it both ways.
And how is this a "privacy" problem when you can't answer whether
scientology is a cult, but at the same time accuse a forum of being a
cult?
And how is it a "privacy" problem that ex-cult members should know
whether you are under some restriction? You advertise yourself as
someone who can counsel ex-members. Yet you can't answer whether
scientology is a cult.
Tilman
Rev Dennis L Erlich
he needs to put on his Field Marshal uniform, turn on the bright light
and fling his accusations at the trembling suspect.
Tilman Hausherr <tilman...@snafu.de> wrote:
>>I have
>>never filed suit against anyone in my life.
tils
>And I thought that there had been a counter-suit because of the illegal
>search-and-seizure. Maybe that was in an alternate universe.
The counter suit was part of the defense, twit.
>The one in
>which you had also said:
>
> I'm sure the cult doesn't have enough money to get me to back
> off.
I took it all the way. There was no backing off. Now it's done. And
here I am.
>I certainly am not going to enter into any agreement with
> the sliem [sic] or go for a gag.
Right. So?
>and
>
> Of course, once the suit is settled, and I collect from the
> cult,
Tils is gonna provide some documentation that this occurred. He
wouldn't dare fling baseless accusations. Not him. I guess he needs
to get a warrant for my financial records and prove his allegations
that way. But someone should tell him this isn't a fascist country.
>the ministry will be looking at how to pay back the
> donations in some way, set up a non-profit internet service
> provider, and establish a half-way house for people coming out
> of cults to make the transition back into society.
Yah! I'm still looking for different ways to repay those who believed
in defense of free speech. One day I hope to fully show my gratitude.
But the projects I'd like to do are expensive. I'm afraid neither I
nor inFormer Ministry have the resources to carry them out at this
time.
And we don't intend to ask for donations for anything, ever again.
Dennis
----------------
"But you see that line there
moving through the station?
I told you, I told you, told you,
I was one of those" - L Cohen
henri
wrote:
>And how is this a "privacy" problem when you can't answer whether
>scientology is a cult, but at the same time accuse a forum of being a
>cult?
He never accused a forum of being a cult.
Saying something displays a cultish mentality is not an accusation of
BEING a cult.
Quit lying, you lying liar.
Out_Of_The_Dark
Thanks for the much appreciated post, Muldoon .
Mary
henri
>>On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 17:38:52 +0100, Tilman Hausherr wrote:
>>>Dennis can say that the "Ex Scientologist Message Board" is a cult.
>In article <dg1ln3ppfjio99c95...@4ax.com>, henri says:
>>He never said that. You're just lying again.
>It looks to me like Tilman wrote "can say", meaning "is able to
>say" that the ESMB is a cult. And since Dennis himself said he
>retains his freedom of speech rights, Tilman didn't lie.
Go pick your navel lint some more, moron. How did you get out of my
killfile?
"And how is this a "privacy" problem when you can't answer whether
scientology is a cult, but at the same time accuse a forum of being a
cult?"
The first statement was a pretty clear implication, but here, he explicitly
says what you desperately tried to deny he was saying. So STFU.
And *plonk*. Pick raisins out of turds with someone else, you
anal-retentive freak.
Out_Of_The_Dark
> On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 21:13:35 +0100, Tilman Hausherr <tilman-use...@snafu.de>> >>On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 17:38:52 +0100, Tilman Hausherr <tilman-use...@snafu.de>
> >>wrote:
> >>>Dennis can say that the "Ex Scientologist Message Board" is a cult.
> >>He never said that. You're just lying again.
> >You're playing with words, in your amateurish attempt to do PR for him.
>
> Don't tell me what the fuck I'm doing, you fascist scum. I'm stating my
> disagreement with your disgusting behavior.
>
> If I were doing PR, I would withhold calling you the piece of shit you are,
> and instead be "polite" about my disagreement. You dumb motherfucker.
> "PR" that, you lying turd. < < < <
Henri, If I had not read it directly from Erlich's post, it's almost
impossible for me to believe that you could be a friend to anyone. You
are the most hatefilled poster on this newsgroup, far exceeding
Barbara Schwarz - who has one of the vilest when she gets going.
If you can't restrain yourself from being so vicious, then you need to
crawl back under that rock where you came from and shut up.
Tom Klemesrud
You have the writing style of a toothy rat spawned in the sewers under
the subway. That doesn't help Dennis any.
Warrior
>>>>
>>>>Dennis can say that the "Ex Scientologist Message Board"
>>>>is a cult.
>>In article <dg1ln3ppfjio99c95...@4ax.com>, henri
>>responded, to Tilman:
>>>
>>>He never said that. You're just lying again.
>On 1 Jan 2008 11:59:05 -0800, Warrior wrote:
>>
>>It looks to me like Tilman wrote "can say", meaning "is able to
>>say" that the ESMB is a cult. And since Dennis himself said he
>>retains his freedom of speech rights, Tilman didn't lie.
In article <9e8ln3lnbtrebp75p...@4ax.com>, henri says:
>
>Go pick your navel lint some more, moron. How did you get out of
>my killfile?
LOL! Are you not in control of your own killfile?
Rob Clark, aka "henri" wrote, quoting Tilman:
>
>"And how is this a "privacy" problem when you can't answer whether
>scientology is a cult, but at the same time accuse a forum of being
>a cult?"
I've yet to see an answer to this question from Tilman.
>The first statement was a pretty clear implication, but here, he
>explicitly says what you desperately tried to deny he was saying.
I didn't deny anything. I posted my opinion on my understanding
of the statement. If I misunderstood I apologize.
>So STFU.
Not likely, Rob.
>And *plonk*. Pick raisins out of turds with someone else, you
>anal-retentive freak.
You've once again proved that you are incapable of rational, civil
discourse. I guess you'll never change.
Warrior - Sunshine disinfects
"Scientology: it's about decepton."
http://warrior.xenu.ca
Warrior
>>
>>It looks to me like Tilman wrote "can say", meaning "is able to
>>say" that the ESMB is a cult. And since Dennis himself said he
>>retains his freedom of speech rights, Tilman didn't lie.
In article <397ln3dj7t3rp4t0i...@4ax.com>, Rev Dennis
L Erlich says...
>
>No, he lied once again. He said what I can and cannot say. Read
>his post.
>
>d
Which one? Do you have the message ID?
Now a direct question for you: Does "ceasing hostilities" include
your refraining from saying and/or posting that Scientology is a
cult?
Please understand I have not followed this discussion very closely.
Warrior
>>
>> Don't tell me what the fuck I'm doing, you fascist scum. I'm stating
>> my disagreement with your disgusting behavior.
>>
>> If I were doing PR, I would withhold calling you the piece of shit
>> you are, and instead be "polite" about my disagreement. You dumb
>> motherfucker. "PR" that, you lying turd.
In article <b31395dd-eea4-476a...@m34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
Out_Of_The_Dark says...
>
>Henri, If I had not read it directly from Erlich's post, it's almost
>impossible for me to believe that you could be a friend to anyone. You
>are the most hatefilled poster on this newsgroup, far exceeding
>Barbara Schwarz - who has one of the vilest when she gets going.
>
>If you can't restrain yourself from being so vicious, then you need to
>crawl back under that rock where you came from and shut up.
Years of Rob's posts to usenet have shown he hasn't changed. I doubt
he ever will. Years ago Rob posted, "Blow up your local Church of
Scientology today". This is a really hateful thing to say. And to
someone like me, who had an adult child as well as many friends still
in the cult, it made me wonder just what sort of person would advocate
such a horrible thing.
Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over 10 years!
> Tilman Hausherr <tilman-use...@snafu.de> wrote:
> >Dennis can say that the "Ex Scientologist Message Board" is a cult.
>
> Go ahead, *sshole. Twist my words anyway you want.
>
> ------------------------
>
>
Moved from other thread to this thread
Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over 10 years!
View profile
More options Jan 1, 4:45 pm
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: "Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over 10 years!"
<ale...@verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2008 13:45:56 -0800 (PST)
Local: Tues, Jan 1 2008 4:45 pm
Subject: Re: Tilman's fanatical fixation
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show
original | Remove | Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Jan 1, 3:52 pm, Rev Dennis L Erlich <infor...@informer.org> wrote:
> "Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over 10 years!"
> <ale...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > whatever,dennis, the fact is, *I* could use that 200$ plus interest
> >right now..
> > that I sent to Mofo
> Sorry Charlie. I don't think MoFo is offering any refunds, let alone
> interest on your donation to the defense fund. Had there been any
> excess, I'm sure they would have considered your thoughtful request.
> Thanks for the kind thoughts.
Dennis,
I guess that is one kind of thought, true.
But there is another kind of though....
The kind of though one takes when the consequences of ones actions
are understood.
The kind of thought that makes keeping ones soul - no harder than
bearing the next pain...
When Lawrence, myself and Bob Penny (who was dyining at the time)
were ordered to engage
in settlement negotiations - to end RTC vs Lerma that's RELIGIOUS
FAKERY CORPORATION and BPI vs FACTNet and the Wollersheim collection
cases...
We had them offerring between 9 and 12 million dollars for us to STFU
and go away.. and a mandatory $50,000 "fine" which WE had to pay and
in addition
they wanted us to agree to pay Thier court costs for collecting the
50K fines from us,
for each time any of us spoke to the media about scientology...
We added up all the money people had sent to us.. to support our
efforts... and all the insurance money we had consumed
and all the INTEREST... and when we added up all of what we felt we
would have to pay out...and considered how much damage 9-12 million
would do to scientology coming out of their pockets.
We told Religious Fakery Corporaion to kiss our collective asses...
Wst World Article about that here:
http://www.lermanet.com/scientologynews/westworld-08-1997.htm
That barely worth mentioning $200 was provided to fund your defense,
with my own explicit understanding that you would never take a
gag....which
was as I recall, something you bragged about.
Oh, the other thing in our settlement papers..
There was a list of names.
Names of people to whome we could NEVER provide help or financial
support to...the same list was in that guys settlement with Digital
Gateway, Brian Haney..
All the fake critics whose claims exceed their worth were not on that
lost... no greenways, no clarks..
but Dennis, I'm certain YOUR name was...as was mine on Brian Haney's
settlement list of people
who must never be given financial support per scientology
Was my name in your settlement?
Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over 10 years!
<ale...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Jan 1, 1:27 pm, Rev Dennis L Erlich <infor...@informer.org> wrote:
>
> > Tilman Hausherr <tilman-use...@snafu.de> wrote:
> > >Dennis can say that the "Ex Scientologist Message Board" is a cult.
>
> > Go ahead, *sshole. Twist my words anyway you want.
>
> Was my name in your settlement?
Bob Minton, Stacy Brooks, Jeff Jacobsen, Vaughn Young, Lawrence
Wollersheim, Steve Hassan, Jesse prince,
Arnie Lerma, FACTNet, Kristi Whacter, and a few others were listed on
Brian Haney's settlement "agreement" ...
and on the rubbish religious fakery center ( see FRAUD
http://www.Lermanet.com/LRonhubbard2.htm )
page of people to whome no financial support could be given..
Religious fakery center wanted to prevent funding additional
litigation, knowing damn well the only standing between their survival
and RICO from HELL that might end scientology forever, was a few
million dollars to pay for it
Spit in digust
"And, those who,
philosophize deceit..." Dylan
Out_Of_The_Dark
> >On Jan 1, 2008 at 3:18pm, henri <he...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> >> Don't tell me what the fuck I'm doing, you fascist scum. I'm stating
> >> my disagreement with your disgusting behavior.
>
> >> If I were doing PR, I would withhold calling you the piece of shit
> >> you are, and instead be "polite" about my disagreement. You dumb
> >> motherfucker. "PR" that, you lying turd.
>
> Out_Of_The_Dark says...
>
>
>
> >Henri, If I had not read it directly from Erlich's post, it's almost
> >impossible for me to believe that you could be a friend to anyone. You
> >are the most hatefilled poster on this newsgroup, far exceeding
> >Barbara Schwarz - who has one of the vilest when she gets going.
>
> >If you can't restrain yourself from being so vicious, then you need to
> >crawl back under that rock where you came from and shut up.
>
> Years of Rob's posts to usenet have shown he hasn't changed. I doubt
> he ever will. Years ago Rob posted, "Blow up your local Church of
> Scientology today". This is a really hateful thing to say. And to
> someone like me, who had an adult child as well as many friends still
> in the cult, it made me wonder just what sort of person would advocate
> such a horrible thing.
>
> Warrior - Sunshine disinfects
> "Scientology: it's about deception."http://warrior.xenu.ca < < <
Mark, I didn't know that but it does not surprise me. I have never
seen a post on ARS by Henri that was not filled with some degree of
hostility backed by hate. When he aims it at decent people, I cannot
help but wonder which side of the fence he's on him this war with
Scientology.
I also find it very difficult to not be concerned about the character
of those who back him up when he posts his attacks.
Questionable comradery is a disease suffered by a minority here and
the result of it is conflict that prevents some semblence of a unified
front against scientology.
Nice to see you visiting us. Happy New year!
Mary
Rev Dennis L Erlich
>"And, those who,
>philosophize deceit..." Dylan
I'm familiar with nearly everything Dylan wrote. I don't recognize
this quote. I couldn't find anything close to it on the web. Where
is it from?
You didn't just make it up out of whole cloth, did you? Tho it would
be ironic if you did.
Dennis
Gerry Armstrong
Lonesome Death Of Hattie Carrol
But you who philosophize disgrace and criticize all fears,
Take the rag away from your face, now ain't the time for your tears.
>
>Dennis
© Gerry Armstrong
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org
Out_Of_The_Dark
Hobo' .
Perhaps Arnie misunderstood the word 'disgrace' with 'deceit' from the
song 'THE LONESOME DEATH OF HATTIE CARROLL' ? I think so.
THE LONESOME DEATH OF HATTIE CARROLL
"....Oh, but you who philosophize disgrace and criticize all fears,
Bury the rag deep in your face
For now's the time for your tears. "
http://bobdylan.com/moderntimes/songs/hattie.html
There is a quote about Dylan lyrics over at Misunderstood Lyrics :
The Most Mumbled Songs of all Time! About Misunderstood Song Lyrics
"We have purposely left every Bob Dylan song off this list. He is
truly the god of mumbled lyrics, and no other singer/songwriter could
hold a candle to his wind."
http://www.popculturemadness.com/Music/Misinderstood.html
Rev Dennis L Erlich
>You didn't just make it up out of whole cloth, did you? Tho it would
>be ironic if you did.
The only time I can find where Dylan used the word "deceit" is in the
old song "I am a Lonesome Hobo." Found my new sig there though. So
It wasn't a complete waste of time.
Dennis
------------------
"Kind ladies and kind gentlemen
Soon I will be gone
But let me just warn you all
Before I do pass on:
Stay free from petty jealousies
Live by no man's code
And hold your judgement for yourself
Lest you wind up on his road."- B. Dylan
Rev Dennis L Erlich
>But you who philosophize disgrace and criticize all fears,
>Take the rag away from your face, now ain't the time for your tears.
It was the "deceit" part I couldn't place.
Andrew Robertson
"Tilman Hausherr" <tilman...@snafu.de> wrote in message
news:cs7ln3lnfb3fq5ue8...@4ax.com...
<snip>
> And how is this a "privacy" problem when you can't answer whether
> scientology is a cult, but at the same time accuse a forum of being a
> cult?
I thought Dennis had made it very clear that the Church of Scientology's
lawyers will be scrutinising anything he says publicly, and won't hesitate
to drag him back into court if they think they can make a case for libel or
contravention of fair use. His attitude seems entirely sensible, and I
don't think he's going to be provoked into intemperate posts as some sort of
a.r.s. re-initiation ceremony. It's easy to search for and read earlier
posts he made to the newsgroup. There's no need for him to repeat himself.
> And how is it a "privacy" problem that ex-cult members should know
> whether you are under some restriction? You advertise yourself as
> someone who can counsel ex-members. Yet you can't answer whether
> scientology is a cult.
Surely someone who counsels others should be careful not to set up barriers
by making their personal feelings too apparent.
Andrew
> Tilman
Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over 10 years!
William Zanzinger killed poor Hattie Carroll
With a cane that he twirled around his diamond ring finger
At a Baltimore hotel society gath'rin'.
And the cops were called in and his weapon took from him
As they rode him in custody down to the station
And booked William Zanzinger for first-degree murder.
But you who philosophize disgrace and criticize all fears,
Take the rag away from your face.
Now ain't the time for your tears.
William Zanzinger, who at twenty-four years
Owns a tobacco farm of six hundred acres
With rich wealthy parents who provide and protect him
And high office relations in the politics of Maryland,
Reacted to his deed with a shrug of his shoulders
And swear words and sneering, and his tongue it was snarling,
In a matter of minutes on bail was out walking.
But you who philosophize disgrace and criticize all fears,
Take the rag away from your face.
Now ain't the time for your tears.
Hattie Carroll was a maid of the kitchen.
She was fifty-one years old and gave birth to ten children
Who carried the dishes and took out the garbage
And never sat once at the head of the table
And didn't even talk to the people at the table
Who just cleaned up all the food from the table
And emptied the ashtrays on a whole other level,
Got killed by a blow, lay slain by a cane
That sailed through the air and came down through the room,
Doomed and determined to destroy all the gentle.
And she never done nothing to William Zanzinger.
But you who philosophize disgrace and criticize all fears,
Take the rag away from your face.
Now ain't the time for your tears.
In the courtroom of honor, the judge pounded his gavel
To show that all's equal and that the courts are on the level
And that the strings in the books ain't pulled and persuaded
And that even the nobles get properly handled
Once that the cops have chased after and caught 'em
And that the ladder of law has no top and no bottom,
Stared at the person who killed for no reason
Who just happened to be feelin' that way without warnin'.
And he spoke through his cloak, most deep and distinguished,
And handed out strongly, for penalty and repentance,
William Zanzinger with a six-month sentence.
Oh, but you who philosophize disgrace and criticize all fears,
Bury the rag deep in your face
For now's the time for your tears.
Rev Dennis L Erlich
>But you who philosophize disgrace and criticize all fears
Hey, close enough. You didn't actually have quotes around it anyway.
D
Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over 10 years!
whether deceit or disgrace the intent and implication fit perfectly
when people ask me about you, here is what I recall
you were the best poster on ars
the clams wanted you to stfu
you got raided...
and you were'nt the first raid
another guy, I think his name was john bostrum was raided a few years
previously..
and if I got the name wrong, I didnt have quotes around him either,
few heard of his case... he committed suicide before he ever walked
into a courtroom
You survived your raid!
and you got the best PRO BONO Lawfirm with the help of
Shari Steele and Mike Godwin of EFF
thats the Mike Godwin of Godwins Law
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
ain't that a chuckle?
http://www.Lermanet.com/scientology-and-occult/
You got Morrison and Forster.. AKA MoFo
You had a better case than I did...
and could have gone all the way, but..
but what?
You chose to live? Afford to care for your mother?
Mine died in 2000. I wish I could have done more.
The FACT you caved in for the dough screwed a LOT of people.
And when you you came back I thought, OK
the SOB is going to fight for his soul back...
OK, Ill support THAT.
But no
You are fighting for hubris.
You have called tilman a liar.
Show me.
Ive never caught him in a lie.
You have implied "I made it up out of whole cloth"
Go fuck yourself mate.
You tell Warrior whose life, unbeknowingst to many was SEVERELY
screwed with by scientology
because of the hieneous crime of being my friend and speaking up after
he saw an old freind
of his getting raided by those nazi=scientology scumballs on CNN. So
they went after his kids.
YOU have to tell the goddamn truth
You want your soul back,
don't you?
Your sell out for slavers dollars screwed US.
and now you want us to lick your shoes?
Earn it you bastard
Do the right thing
You could start any time.
unsigned
Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over 10 years!
<ale...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Jan 1, 11:06 pm, Rev Dennis L Erlich <infor...@informer.org> wrote:
>
>
Rumors Ive heard about Dennis's case
2.5 Million in cash given to Mofo to be held in a Trust Fund
and dennis gets monthly payments from the stash of slavers money...
As long as Dennis OBEYS THE DWARF's AGREEMENT
he will continue to get his weekly allowance...
One letter from the asthmatic dwarf to Mofo and Dennis
might be humbled with having to work for a living...
Dennis will not criticize "scientology" < in quotes you asswipe
or say eg: "scientology blows"
Litigation ended.. No court case, no public trial...
no media...one approved statement from MoFo
then the silence of a man with no soul.
Those that take money for silence or ANY CONDITION IMPOSED BY SLAVERS
becomes, by definition, a co-participant, a co-conspirator in the
FRAUD of Scientology.
http://www.Lermanet.com/silence.htm
Scientology Gag Agreements - A Conspiracy for Silence
The first principle of a free society is an untrammeled flow of words
in an open forum. Adlai Stevenson (1900-1965), U.S. Democratic
politician. New York Times (19 Jan. 1962).
An Actual GAG Agreement:
Damien Von Markif, in Australia, sent me this GAG AGREEMENT
What is your take on this?
Does this sound like this is a "church" engaged in "charitable
activity"
or a Spiritual ponzi game engaged in a conspiracy to intimidate
witnesses into silence by extortionate conduct?
Some of the previous gag agreements:
A Psychiatrist from the east coast who was an early critic of
scientology
The Allard Case:
Gene Allard 300,000 1976
Flynn Litigation [ BOSTON ] 1986
Flynn settled his in 3 stages.
Stage 1 was Garritano, Graves etc in Boston. original complainants
Stage 2 were the Tampa Cases which included Wakefield, Burden, McLean
joined suit
Stage 3 were the California Cases which included Armstrong, Walters,
Sullivan, and some others witnesses that during settlement scientology
wished to gag, so used the pretence of the litigation to make them
cash offers, one was to Bill Franks for $50,000
Michael Flynn 1,075,000
Gerry Armstrong 850,000
Homer Schomer 650,000 ?
Gabe Cazares " ? "We can't talk about the terms of the settlement,"
Cazares said Friday. "But I make no secret about the fact Maggie and I
are not unhappy about the settlement. In fact, we're smiling."
Martin Samuels ?
Nell and Nan Mclean
James Garritano
Peter Graves
Marjory Wakefield, 220,000
Tonya Burden"Ms. Burden is satisfied with the settlement," attorney
Michael Tabb said. "I wish I could tell you more."
Lavenda VonSchaik 50,000
Eddie Walters [ witness for Wollersheim case ]
Laurel Sullivan
Jim and Nancy Dincalci
Bill Franks 50,000
The Flynn settlements also required that those involved not make
themselves available
for service of process, e.g.,I'll be on the Capitol steps at 10 am
tomorrow if you want
to serve me with a witness subpoena.
End of Flynn's Boston litigation
Vicky and Richard Aznaran 250,000
Bent Corydon $800,000
Roxanne Friend Approximately 400,000
Julie Christofferson ?
Titchbourne ?
Zizics - 200,000 the Dentist ex-wise couple in Chicago whose visit
with mark Bunker to the org was used as an excuse to try and frame
Mark Bunker for Criminal Trespass charges - found not guilty - but
cost Bob Minton 50 grand in defense costs... the Zizics later got
their money back from scientology but had to sign a gag agreement
Raul Lopez - 750,000 2002
David MAYO... 2.5 million? 1997?
Enid Vien ? 1995?
Dennis Erlich - 2.5 mill ? 1997?
John Caban
Pedro Lerma et al. ? All complainants in the Spanish Criminal case
were harassed incessantly and offered settlements to drop their
original complaints, I was in telephone contact with one of the
complainants, an American named John Caban, a jeweler, who also put
Pedro Lerma (no direct relation that I know of) on the telephone one
time. After all the other complainants had been harassed into
accepting scientology's settlement offers.. John called me and related
the amount of pressure he was under, and the fact he was the last man
standing...he sounded apologetic, almost ashamed, that he could not
continue..to stand alone, which brings up another point, no man can
stand alone against organized fascist tactics, it takes your support
to keep going. Every target of Scientology they wish to handle is
subject to a campaign to isolate them, until they feel alone.. this
tactic reduces the cash pay outs of scientology necessary to silence
their enemies. So don't think that what you do, has no effect. Doing
and saying NOTHING is what aids Scientology's campaign for SILENCE.
David Miscavige bragged about this during the 2002 new years
event, saying that even when the prosecution called its own witnesses
"Scientology Worked" -
Chris Clouteir: Upon my wishing to vacate staff, after being secluded
for 6 months, awaiting my 5th consecutive comm ev, I was offered the
500.00 leaving staff $$$ to sign paperwork that stated I wouldn't sue
the church. I didn't sign and therefore didn't get the 500.00. from
Chris Cloutier a 'Flag Trained Original', :Golden Age Of Tech Word
Clearer, posted at A.S.H.O. --Highest tech training org on west
coast."
Tom Pagett says he was offered a gag agreement re scientology by the
Judge in chambers..in exchange for ending an action against him in his
custody case, Tom Pagett recently had his acting debut in Brett
Hanover's production of "The Bridge", in this short movie, Tom new the
routine well, having lived it, with children who disconnected form
him, after he realized what Scientology really was.
There was a man mentioned as being paid $5000 to shut up and go away
who knew Suzette Hubbard, this was in one of the major books
Brian Haney - Not 'gagged' but can't provide any funding to be used by
those who seek to expose or publicize Scientology...
And of course they tried with Lawrence Wollersheim Bob Penny and yours
truly for the gag and for among other things to avoid a final opinion
in RTC vs Lerma:
" Scientologists believe that most human problems can be traced to
lingering spirits of an extraterrestrial people massacred by their
ruler, Xenu, over 75 million years ago. These spirits attach
themselves by "clusters" to individuals in the contemporary world,
causing spiritual harm and negatively influencing the lives of their
hosts ". USD Judge Leonie Brinkema 4 Oct 96 Memorandum Opinion, RTC vs
Lerma
(Webmaster NB: Scientology has an established history of procuring
silence as merely the cost of doing business. Scientology admitted
spending $1,740,000 in legal costs suing me for posting to the
internet the Fishman Affidavit, the story of Xenu and more.. in August
1995, which you recently watched on Comedy Central's Emmy Nominated
South Park segment called "In the Closet". They also failed to silence
this webmaster - Arnie Lerma, Lawrence Wollersheim and Bob Penny after
we refused a 9 to 12 MILLION dollar CASH offer in exchange for our
collective SILENCE.) See Westworld Article "Hush Hush Money" and see
my summary of the Gagged agreements that I know about HERE and see The
South Park Xenu Story is Real page HERE)
Please help me make a complete summary based on whatever is known....
about the pattern of conduct of pursuit of silence... as a simple cost
of doing business to make sure the L Ron the KING of CON's show goes
on...
these are just the ones that we know something about, gag agreements
being what they are, many are reluctant to discuss them, consider this
just the tip of the gag orders
Libel Litigation is also pursued in a quest for Silence
Scientology versus TIME Magazine - Scientology fought all the way to
the US supreme court, Scientology LOST, and it has been affirmed by
the US Supreme Court that it is not LIBELOUS to say that:
"Scientology is quite likely the most ruthless, the most
classically terroristic, the most litigious and the most lucrative
cult the country has ever seen. No cult extracts more money from its
members."
Citations for journalists to give to nervous editors are HERE:
[ Link to the Article ]- has been DENIED by the United States Supreme
Court [link to docket entry ] after being DISMISSED by the 2nd
Circuit Court of Appeals : from the 2nd Circuit's Dismissal:
"To the extent that the Behar Article uses the term "Scientology,"
Chief Judge Walker is of the view that the term as used denotes a
belief system,
or, as the Article puts it, a "cult," [page 8]
In response to the Time article Scientology harassed the writer
Richard Behar and attacked Time Magazine's character, using Fallacious
Argument Techniques, to such a degree that they won a mention in
Magazine Week.
"Temper, Temper, Temper Award - To the Church of Scientology,
which spent $30 million on an ad campaign designed to discredit a Time
Magazine story that labeled Scientology a "Cult of Greed," and then
harassed Readers Digest when it attempted to run the article in
abbreviated form," Magazine Week - Dec 30, 1991
The Washington Post was added to the RTC vs Lerma Copyright and Trade
secret Lawsuit, and after Judge Brinkema dismissed their trade secret
claims, RTC settled with Washington Post by paying the Washington post
$500,000 for their attorney fees.* - An informed source said...
Scientology sued Paul Krassner for $750,000 He writes in the Forward
of Peter Lavenda's Book III of his Sinister Forces Series :"In 1971, I
began to write an article, "The Rise of Sirhan Sirhan in the
Scientology Hierarchy" for my satirical magazine, The Realist. Then,
in the course of my research, a strange thing happened. I learned of
the actual involvement of Charles Manson with Scientology. In fact,
there had been an E-Meter at the Spahn Ranch where his "family"
stayed. Suddenly, I no longer had any reason to use Sirhan Sirhan as
my protagonist. Reality will transcend allegory every time. So,
although I had announced that I was going to publish that article, I
started investigating the Manson case instead. Nevertheless,
Scientology sued me for $750,000 for just those nine words- whoops,
there goes the whole petty cash account-but I chose to fight them on l
st Amendment grounds, and they eventually dropped the suit."
The ACLU's Harvey Silvergate
On Declan McCullagh's Politech Web Site "Harvey Silverglate warns of
anti-Scientology bigotry"
Mr. Silvergate who is a "former president of the ACLU of Massachusetts
and a current board member" wrote:
"Declan,
I realize that my objectivity may be questioned, because during a 5-
year span in the 1980s I represented the Church of Scientology in a
series of bogus "religious fraud" cases brought against the Church in
Boston and elsewhere. However, I did get to learn a lot about
Scientology during this period. Anyone who takes the trouble to study
the Church will understand that while it is of course true that
Scientology is careful to portray itself as a religion in part to ward
off governmental and individual attacks for "fraud", in fact the
reason it is able to do so, with considerable success, is that there
is, conceptually, no difference between Scientology and any
established and accepted religion of which I'm aware. "
So, let us put Mr. Silvergate's statement into perspective....
"a series of bogus "religious fraud" cases" = that were worth more
than TEN MILLION DOLLARS { Referring to the "Flynn" litigation NB:The
total of just the amounts we know about, adjusted to 2002 dollars) to
the Scientology Ponzi scheme for their silence,
for their SILENCE.....!!
destroy utterly, if possible
Scientology conducts its litigation, not to win but to "destroy
utterly, if possible"... for Scientology, litigation in pursuit of
silence is merely the cost of doing business.
South Carolina Judges Seek to Ban Secret Settlements
Read the NY Times article: South Carolina Judges Seek to Ban Secret
Settlements By ADAM LIPTAK. Adam Liptak's article in the New York
Times quoting Chief Judge Joseph Anderson of the South Carolina
Federal Judicial District saying about civil gag agreements that:
"It meant that secrecy was something bought and sold right under a
judge's nose."
Amen...
You see, there is a global scam of truly epic proportions which seeks
to sell the public "A Piece of Blue Sky". The incredible profits of
selling such a 'commodity' under tax-exempt corporate structures make
the purchase of gag-agreements merely a cost of doing business.
I have lost friends that I once had to gag agreements, as a result of
Mr. Silvergate's effort.
The existence of Scientology is completely dependent upon what I
describe as a conspiracy for silence to be able to still lure
unsuspecting young people into Hubbard's trap.. For Scientology, it is
a pattern of conduct, and just the cost of doing business.
Chief Federal Judge Anderson and his peers in South Carolina Federal
District seem to have the courage and foresight to identify this
threat to both our nation's founder's First Amendment guarantees as
well as the income of certain lawyers.
"To dispose a soul to action, we must upset its equilibrium" Eric
Hoffer
Tom Klemesrud
> On Jan 1, 11:24 pm, "Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over 10 years!"
> <ale...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>On Jan 1, 11:06 pm, Rev Dennis L Erlich <infor...@informer.org> wrote:
>>
>>more hubris
>
>
>
> Rumors Ive heard about Dennis's case
>
> 2.5 Million in cash given to Mofo to be held in a Trust Fund
> and dennis gets monthly payments from the stash of slavers money...
>
> As long as Dennis OBEYS THE DWARF's AGREEMENT
> he will continue to get his weekly allowance...
> One letter from the asthmatic dwarf to Mofo and Dennis
> might be humbled with having to work for a living...
>
> Dennis will not criticize "scientology" < in quotes you asswipe
>
> or say eg: "scientology blows"
I see what the deal is now. And I see why Dennis is so upset. If these
rumors are true, it would take a big hit on Dennis's credibility not
only as a Reverend ministering to cult victims, but as a specialist of
Bob Dylan lyrics on this particular newsgroup. (I noticed that on his
previous post he totally ignored the contents of your messages, and then
quoted your signature file, and change the subject.):-)
Of course if this rumor is true, he won't be able to address that.
That's the dilemma that he must find himself in if there is a gag
agreement out there.
However, from Rob Clark at least, I feel that a floodgate of statements
like you are a Nazi, but at the same time a communist who supports the
notions of Hugos Chavez, coming on down the pipe, for speaking out so
frankly for what you and others here feel might be a travesty of justice.
>
> Litigation ended.. No court case, no public trial...
> no media...one approved statement from MoFo
> then the silence of a man with no soul.
>
> Those that take money for silence or ANY CONDITION IMPOSED BY SLAVERS
> becomes, by definition, a co-participant, a co-conspirator in the
> FRAUD of Scientology
Arnie, I agree with this.
But, Dennis says said that he is not silenced in anyway. As I
understand it, he has said that there is no secret agreement, or
contract that he has signed, with Scientology--rather he just chooses to
not criticize them anymore, because he has done so much of it in the
pastm and, it is a matter of protecting his privacy.
One has to ask however if the other party to such an agreement knows
about it, why would telling kindred spirits about the agreement impinge
on his privacy?
However when I look at it, there has to be another document to explain
where the money came from to buy the house in Palm Springs. In the
document that I saw online, Dennis was permanently enjoined from quoting
a list of Scientology materials. He was also fined $69,000. I don't
think that is the victory that Dennis was talking about. In fact that
judgment looks like a loss to Dennis and Morrison Forrester. It seems
to me there is another document.
Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over 10 years!
And one more thing...
in case the following did not occur to you
Scientology litigates for one purpose - SILENCE.
The chump change you got, was just the 'cost of doing business' for
a shrinking, one time, 100 million a year scam...
When scientology gets a gag, THEY WIN.
Geddit?
Scientology WON THE ERLICH CASE
they got what they wanted
Scientology WON the Lisa Case
They got what they wanted..
I stated previously that you had the best case...
and the best lawfirm
a ProBono firm... so you didnt have to worry about
running out of money to litigate..
At the INSTANT scientology found out that Lawrence Wollersheim had
made me a Director for Fight Against Coercive Tactics Network, a 501-
C3 Non profit..
Registered by David Bardine..who said that this rubbish we deal with,
the online character assisination efforts thats Ive managed to
survive
all the time you were off redecorating your kitchen... this crap will
continue until there is
a fund established to cover the costs of litigation with nazi-
sociopaths with
money to burn such as Scientology, or the Moonies, or whatever...
(at the instant scn found out about the 2 million in insurance we had,
they
opened a 2nd case in colorado to run us out of money!!! and when the
money started
to run out the cowboys from wisconsin went running for greener
pastures...)
http://www.lermanet.com/cos/tomkelly.htm
When Bob was dumping millions into the LMT, you know how much money'
came in from 'others' to help the cause? A couple of grand...!!
Hell, when you were begging for dollars online for Mofo Defense fund,
how much actually did come in?
Was it a couple of grand?!?
Lermanet.com.. it takes in a couple of grand a year.wow..
Cant pay the mortgage with that...or even the legal bills...
FactNet... even though they have been audited a couple times by the
IRS
after a certain felonious cult of neo-nazi scumbags who have a dwarf
for a leader
sent in anonymous reports....
it didn't take long to add up the5-9 thousand they bring in..a year...
So why in Gods name does an occasional Law firm step up
to the plate and go to bat?
Its not for the money from the case...It surely isnt to get a chance
to
administer a 2.5 million settlement trust fund
They do it because they want to make good law and see
an opportunity to make widely citable precedents that
build the reputation and visibility of the firm in the legal
community, and media, so the best and brightest WANT to work for
peanuts, in order to work with the lawyers that won THAT
BIG CASE.. and made that big law changing appeal.. to the supreme
court..
Law that makes his a better world..
Meanwhile, Scientology for years has been doing strategic litigation
JUST TO make Citable case law that can be used to make
it financially in legal costs impossible for someone to get
recourse...
say, like ExOT8 Donna Shannon.. who left a year ago or so..
http://www.lermanet.com/donna-shannon/
who now cant even FIND a lawyer to take on scientology
for FRAUD on her behalf..
You had the best case, and the best lawyers, (though mine in the
beginning,
and very end were extraordinary...Thank you David Masselli, http://www.mllaw.com
The ones in the middle screwed me...and ran like rats after the money
ran out
to litigate.. Oh thats unethical.... People have no idea...
http://www.lermanet2.com/cos/tomkelly.htm
YOU, Mr Elrlich, had the best chance to make new law. New GOOD LAW,
new good citable judicial quotes
like these: http://www.lermanet.com/cos/whatjudgessay.htm
But where are the Erlich judges quotes?
Where is the Final ruling?
Where is the appellate rulings that make a case citable?
There they are!
Fixing your kitchen up real pretty.. how nice...
IN RTC vs Lerma we got some GREAT judicial opinions.. that have helped
make scientology
litigation too expensive for scientology to pursue!
"the Court is now convinced that the primary motivation of RTC
[$cientology] in suing Lerma,
DGS and The Post is to stifle criticism of Scientology in general and
to harass its critics."
Scientologists believe that most human problems can be traced to
lingering
spirits of an extraterrestrial people massacred by their ruler, Xenu,
over 75 million years ago.
These spirits attach themselves by "clusters" to individuals in the
contemporary world,
causing spiritual harm and negatively influencing the lives of their
hosts "
which brought us South Park
.... "The Court earlier dismissed the trade secrets count as to all
defendants
and the copyright infringement count as to the Washington Post and its
reporters.
RTC voluntarily dismissed its claims against Digital Gateway systems,
Therefore, the only issue remaining in the case is RTC's: ..
(3) copyright infringement claim against defendant Lerma"
And in an incredible stroke of luck.. I mean Dennis, the lucky breaks
Ive
gotten made me believe in some far greater power..
By a stroke of luck, RTC vs Lerma got cited in another 4th
circuit court ruling! So.. it got "aff'd" and is citable!
Those good old boys down in Richmond do NOT like neo-nazi cults...
and why am I mad?
Not cause you implied insult to me, but because you started to
use scientology and nazi techniques of fallacious argument upon my
friends.
YOU need to learn what scientology did to you.
Dr Joost meerloo can explain it to you in his book about the Nazis
http://www.lermanet.com/scientology/
called The Rape of the Mind
Read it and heal.
Arnie Lerma
-----------------
end-of-rant
Albert Einstein said the following:
"A human being is part of the whole, called by us 'universe,'
limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and
feelings as something separated from the rest - a kind of optical
delusion
of his consciousness. This delusion is a prison, restricting us to our
personal desires and to affection for a few persons close to us.
Our task must be to free ourselves from our prison by widening
our circle of compassion to embrace all humanity and the whole of
nature and its beauty."
Communist Party directive issued in 1943:
"Members and front organizations must continually embarrass,
discredit and degrade our critics.... When obstructionists
become too irritating, label them as fascist or Nazi or
anti-Semitic.... Constantly associate those who oppose us
with those names that already have a bad smell.
The association will, after enough repetition, become
"fact" in the public mind." -- 1956 Report of the House
Committee on Un-American Activities (volume 1, page 347)
Out_Of_The_Dark
Well, now that things have been put in the proper
perspective.......... let me add that there are hundreds of Narconon
related gag agreement settlements across the country; non-
scientologists who have been ripped off who complain and demand their
money be refunded. Many have given up after finding that their
complaints were being met with scientology lawyers and their
games....... It's almost a given that a gag agreement forced and put
in place in order to get the money back so they can get the addicted
person some real help........One man in particular has never given up,
even if he's under a gag agreement; when he gets emails from other
victims, he forwards them to people he can trust so they they can try
to help lead these people to at least getting their 25k some=odd
refund. He's getting more victims to post their stories on the
internet like he did, so the information is there. He does what he can
with humility and without hubris. Vince Daniels called him a
backslider for taking the refund and signing the agreement just hours
before he was to appear on the radio show, but look what happened
Vince Daniels?
We as former Scientologists may have forgotten what it's like to walk
a mile a non exscientologist's shoes but for those who got suckered
into the Narconon scam, it was their worst nightmare in finding out
that Narconon is Scientology and then trying to get their refund. Each
one only wants to get back to the business of getting their loved one
appropriate drug or alcohal rehab care but CoS does not care. The
lawyers for the Scientology front group called Narconon are having a
heyday spinning these victims in. It's quite different for a former
active critic who settled with scientology to come strolling back
onto ARS to think he can just ignore the concerns of others who
depended upon him to be straight up with them and supported him in the
past.
Your defense of Tilman and Warrior is admirable and necessary. Your
post is well stated. There is something so wrong with this situation
and Henri being Erlich's attack dog today. I am glad you posted this
to help cut through the bs.
Nomen Nescio
Dennis says he isn't gagged. He says that it is 100% his decision to refrain from saying that Scientology is a harmful cult.
The guy has no problem with speaking his mind. He's a tough guy. He calls 'em as he see 'em.
So if he isn't gagged and has no problem with saying whats on his mind, and he's back posting on a newsgroup devoted to discussing Scientology yet he won't say Scientology is a harmful cult - there is only one conclusion to arrive at.
HE DOESN'T THINK SCIENTOLOGY IS A HARMFUL CULT.
WTF?
If there is any flaw to this logic I'm sure someone will point it out, but I can't see how else it could be.
Unless....
He's lying.
Either way he's playing us for fools.
Why is he here? It's obviously NOT to discuss Scientology, NOT to discuss his settlement, NOT to answer any questions that are the least bit uncomfortable. He values his privacy this lad. He's said so over and over. So why the hell is he here? To discuss finding God? That's off topic and nauseous to most people here.
If he values his privacy, why is he posting to ars?
Here is my suggestion for you Dennis. Crawl back to that Bittersquash/Greenway cabal IRC channel who protects and champions you and won't question you. That same channel you've been holed up in for 7 years doing nothing but bitching about Lerma or Minton or anyone who happens to be in their sights. There you can evade any question you like with the help of your PR guy (Henri) and your door bitch (Greenway). You can yap happily about your new car and your lovely house and your non existant ministry and no one will care. At least you aren't wasting any bandwidth doing that.
Out_Of_The_Dark
I question the validity and integrity of anything posted by an anon
using the name Nomen Nescio, no matter how many partial truths the
post contains.
Now shoo.....
Patty Pieniadz
"Nomen Nescio" <nob...@dizum.com> wrote in message
news:478f892f4887462e...@dizum.com...
I can feel the love!
Patty
Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over 10 years!
> Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over 10 years! wrote:
>
>
Dear Mr Klemesrud..
1st thank you for your input... you were Dennis's ISP and co-defendant
in that case..
you know more than any of us about what went on...
>
> > On Jan 1, 11:24 pm, "Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over 10 years!"
> > <ale...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> >>On Jan 1, 11:06 pm, Rev Dennis L Erlich <infor...@informer.org> wrote:
>
> >>more hubris
>
> > Rumors Ive heard about Dennis's case
>
> > 2.5 Million in cash given to Mofo to be held in a Trust Fund
> > and dennis gets monthly payments from the stash of slavers money...
>
> > As long as Dennis OBEYS THE DWARF's AGREEMENT
> > he will continue to get his weekly allowance...
> > One letter from the asthmatic dwarf to Mofo and Dennis
> > might be humbled with having to work for a living...
>
> > Dennis will not criticize "scientology" < in quotes you asswipe
>
> > or say eg: "scientology blows"
>
> I see what the deal is now. And I see why Dennis is so upset. If these
> rumors are true, it would take a big hit on Dennis's credibility not
> only as a Reverend ministering to cult victims, but as a specialist of
> Bob Dylan lyrics on this particular newsgroup. (I noticed that on his
> previous post he totally ignored the contents of your messages, and then
> quoted your signature file, and change the subject.):-)
Yes the technology that built the pyramids (to turn men into slaves)
and built the third reich (to turn men into slaves) WORKS...
but there is no magic to it... only a few stage patter techniques of
direction of attention
"Misdirection of Attention - Another Magic Show Technique
Any questioning or inquiry by those being introduced to the
Scientology mind control program is dealt with by careful and
deliberate misdirection of attention onto many, many, little details;
rundowns, actions, clay table training, and Training Routines, word
clearing, etc. ad nauseam.
Scientology uses this identical pattern of misdirection of attention
technique on judges as well as government officials, media and critics
on the Internet. They baffle people with details that are meaningless,
seeking to fixate on inconsequential details - all with one express
intent and purpose, to ensure you miss the big picture.
"Ye shall know them by their acts"
It's just that these 'acts' are appropriate fare only in a carnival
magic show.
"Reality" in Scientology is defined as "AGREEMENT". To maintain the
apparency of this agreement critics must be silenced, especially
anyone who points out how the trick is done. We are dealing with
nothing more than a magic show...of global proportions.
One hell of a trick. "
http://www.lermanet.com/exit/FINAL.htm
>
> Of course if this rumor is true, he won't be able to address that.
> That's the dilemma that he must find himself in if there is a gag
> agreement out there.
>
> However, from Rob Clark at least, I feel that a floodgate of statements
> like you are a Nazi, but at the same time a communist who supports the
> notions of Hugos Chavez, coming on down the pipe, for speaking out so
> frankly for what you and others here feel might be a travesty of justice.
>
>
The document cited here:
http://home.snafu.de/tilman/mystory/dennis_final_judgement.txt
I have never seen before...
We are witness to an attempt to rewrite history...
Orwellian style.
That is NOT the settlement... it refers to A settlement, not even to
the 1st one years previously, that no one has seen.
Scientology is playing magic show tricks on us. Here, here, look at
this This 1999 choreographed production. Where Dennis
gets a nice stipend and Scientology can turn a horses ass case into a
GREAT BIG WIN! (tm) Religious Fakery Center Incorporated
bought and paid for by scientology in the previous settlement
agreement back in 1996 or 7 when the dennis dissappeared..
and my computer was stolen from my hotel room, in chicago, where I was
working for patricia greenway...and only two people knew where I was
staying... guess who?? And cause of that timely breakin...and
theft...I lost touch with Dennis WHILE HE WAS IN SETTLEMENT
NEGOTIATIONS WITH SCIENTOLOGY.
Scientology was paying Dennis so Dennis could APPEAR to pay them
65,000 in THIS DOCUMENT
< HERE LOOK AT THIS
THIS IS THE SETTLEMENT. !!!
horse manure...
Some manure is citable, and I quote:
Upon all of the proceedings in this action and pursuant to a
Settlement Agreement dated
, in part <--[written in]
21 April 30, 1999, which include^a stipulated final judgment
and permanent injunction to be ordered
22 by the Court, and good cause appearing therefor:
There is no one behind the curtain, and PS Rob clark says that Tilman
and Arnie are Nazis...
SO THERE!
Any questions?
Gerry Armstrong
<info...@informer.org> wrote:
>Heh, thanks to Tilly for digging this old stuff up. What a guy! Now
>he needs to put on his Field Marshal uniform, turn on the bright light
>and fling his accusations at the trembling suspect.
>
>Tilman Hausherr <tilman...@snafu.de> wrote:
>
>>>I have
>>>never filed suit against anyone in my life.
>
>tils
>>And I thought that there had been a counter-suit because of the illegal
>>search-and-seizure. Maybe that was in an alternate universe.
>
>The counter suit was part of the defense, twit.
No it isn't. In fact, if its only purpose is defense, and you know and
admit your cross-complaint contains no legitimate cause of action
against the cross-defendant, it might be prima facie malicious
prosecution. IANAL, but I think I'd rethink and restate your averment
that the counter suit was only a defensive action and not a suit
against someone that you filed, which it is.
>
>>The one in
>>which you had also said:
>>
>> I'm sure the cult doesn't have enough money to get me to back
>> off.
>
>I took it all the way. There was no backing off. Now it's done. And
>here I am.
>
>>I certainly am not going to enter into any agreement with
>> the sliem [sic] or go for a gag.
>
>Right. So?
Why communicate the way you do or don't, then, about the Scientology
cult and its dangers? I would hate to attribute even baser motives
than conformance with a contractual agreement with the cult.
Your situation is similar to mine, and I have a personal legal
interest, in addition to the interest every Scientology victim or
target has, in your facts and approach, and have been reading your
posts since you arrived on a.r.s. a few weeks ago.
I've also been reading Tilman's posts recently, and for many years,
and I believe, from what I've seen, that he has conducted himself
honorably and reasonably in his exchanges with you, and that your
reactions to him have been unwarranted and bullying.
You identify what you've been doing as "reacting badly" to Tilman's
communications, and I think that this recognition is probably a good
first step to doing something other than react badly. If reacting as
badly as you've been reacting is what you really want to do, then
definitely disregard my suggestion.
>
>>and
>>
>> Of course, once the suit is settled, and I collect from the
>> cult,
>
>Tils is gonna provide some documentation that this occurred.
But what, that the suit was settled? You say it I believe, and in fact
say, to me rather ominiously, that you have no conflict with the
Scientology cult.
Didn't you collect anything from the cult? Are you just being nuttily
evasive?
> He
>wouldn't dare fling baseless accusations. Not him. I guess he needs
>to get a warrant for my financial records and prove his allegations
>that way. But someone should tell him this isn't a fascist country.
That kind of communication is bullying, and if it makes any difference
to you, stupid.
>
>>the ministry will be looking at how to pay back the
>> donations in some way, set up a non-profit internet service
>> provider, and establish a half-way house for people coming out
>> of cults to make the transition back into society.
>
>Yah! I'm still looking for different ways to repay those who believed
>in defense of free speech. One day I hope to fully show my gratitude.
>But the projects I'd like to do are expensive.
There are things you could do for free, but you just don't like doing
any of them. Is that what you mean?
> I'm afraid neither I
>nor inFormer Ministry have the resources to carry them out at this
>time.
>
>And we don't intend to ask for donations for anything, ever again.
>
>Dennis
>
>----------------
>
>"But you see that line there
>moving through the station?
>I told you, I told you, told you,
>I was one of those" - L Cohen
© Gerry Armstrong
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org
Magoo1
wrote:
> "Magoo" <mago...@charter.net> wrote:
> >The man did what he needed to do, and he's been a huge asset
> >to many who have left C of S, as well as critics.
>
> Thanks for noticing.
Velcome :)
>
> >Whatever your personal deal is with him, e-mail him. I'm sure he'd be happy
> >to answer you, or not.
>
> NOT! Once bitten ...
OK...........I stand correct, and good point.
>
> >Either way, it's a personal issue. Please keep it so,
> >and stick to what you do best, which IS finding FACTS and posting them, not
> >questioning a group about another critic's personal life and decisions.
>
> I think he's studying to be a proctologist.
ROTFLOL~ Now *that* is funny, considering the topic.
Happy New Year to you, Dennis :)
Tory/Magoo~~~
>
> Dennis
Warrior
>>>
>>>It looks to me like Tilman wrote "can say", meaning "is able to
>>>say" that the ESMB is a cult. And since Dennis himself said he
>>>retains his freedom of speech rights, Tilman didn't lie.
>In article <397ln3dj7t3rp4t0i...@4ax.com>, Rev Dennis
>L Erlich says...
>>
>>No, he lied once again. He said what I can and cannot say. Read
>>his post.
>>
>>d
In article <209221621.000...@drn.newsguy.com>,
Warrior asked:
>
>Which one? Do you have the message ID?
>
>Now a direct question for you: Does "ceasing hostilities" include
>your refraining from saying and/or posting that Scientology is a
>cult?
>
>Please understand I have not followed this discussion very closely.
Still waiting for the message ID.
Also, has the Settlement Agreement dated April 30, 1999 ever been
made public?
Lermanet_com Exposing the CON for 10 Years!
A strange thing just happened on google news at 12:12 AM Jan 2
Both Erlich Threads appear to have been deleted
I think we have a hot 'item' folks.
SAVE THE POSTS IN THIS THREAD NOW
Arnie Lerma
I'd prefer to die speaking my mind than live fearing to speak
http://www.Lermanet.com
Gerry Armstrong
<a...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
>
>"Tilman Hausherr" <tilman...@snafu.de> wrote in message
>news:cs7ln3lnfb3fq5ue8...@4ax.com...
>
><snip>
>
>> And how is this a "privacy" problem when you can't answer whether
>> scientology is a cult, but at the same time accuse a forum of being a
>> cult?
>
>
>I thought Dennis had made it very clear that the Church of Scientology's
>lawyers will be scrutinising anything he says publicly,
No he did not to me at least. Where? That's what I've wanted to know
for a couple of weeks.
>and won't hesitate
>to drag him back into court if they think they can make a case for libel or
>contravention of fair use.
What? Who on earth does that not apply to? LF
No one. LFBD F/N
If there's no "agreement," then the cult lawyers would be looking for
the same things they look for from every other wog on the planet.
If there is an "agreement," then the cult's lawyers won't be looking
to Dennis for libel or copyright violations. They'll be looking for
contract violations.
But either way, why would he then act the way he has been acting? I
know he credits Rob Clark as a long time advisor (or, to cover all
bases, something like that) but he has pursued a path of relative
self-destruction, bullying the very people he would want to support
him *if* the cult's lawyers do drag him back into court.
Actually, what he's doing could be his fulfillment of an "agreement."
> His attitude seems entirely sensible, and I
>don't think he's going to be provoked into intemperate posts as some sort of
>a.r.s. re-initiation ceremony.
But his posts *have* been intemperate.
> It's easy to search for and read earlier
>posts he made to the newsgroup. There's no need for him to repeat himself.
By that standard, there's no need for anyone to even be here on a.r.s.
But having arrived here, his relationship with the Scientology cult,
including his legal relationship, are of considerable interest. Adding
in his bullying of good people, and Rob Clark's jumping in to bully
the same people on the same subject, and the interest cannot be
avoided.
>
>> And how is it a "privacy" problem that ex-cult members should know
>> whether you are under some restriction? You advertise yourself as
>> someone who can counsel ex-members. Yet you can't answer whether
>> scientology is a cult.
>
>Surely someone who counsels others should be careful not to set up barriers
>by making their personal feelings too apparent.
Ridiculous. But in any case, the barriers in Dennis' counseling
paradigm are, apparently, cult imposed, although he says something
about accepting them voluntarily.
I have come to accept that in my own case I would have been mentally
impaired if I had actually respected the barriers to free
communication about Scientology that the cult sought to impose, and
which its lawyers do indeed drag me into court over. Perhaps that's a
factor in what Dennis calls "reacting badly" to questions or comments,
and what I see as bullying, and the communication practices that goes
with it.
>
>Andrew
>
>
>> Tilman
>
>> Tilman Hausherr [KoX, SP5.55] Entheta * Enturbulation * Entertainment
>> http://www.xenu.de
>>
>> Resistance is futile. You will be enturbulated. Xenu always prevails.
>>
>> Find broken links on your web site:
>> http://home.snafu.de/tilman/xenulink.html
>> The Xenu bookstore:
>> http://home.snafu.de/tilman/bookstore.html
>
>
© Gerry Armstrong
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org
Gerry Armstrong
<androi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>cultxpt wrote:
>> On Dec 30, 8:24 am, RolandRB <rolandbe...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Is Dennis Erlich allowed to say that Scientology is a harmful cult?
>>>
>>> Enquiring minds want to know.
>>>
>>> Roland
>>
>> Why would that matter?
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shibboleth
>
>The vain hope that there is some word or phrase that someone acting for
>Scientology can't repeat.
Not so at all. Cult opponents with a clue know that ops will say
anything. Miscavige will say anything, or have his agents say
anything. They'll all, however, say Xenu easier than Scientology
doesn't work.
But what a person says about Scientology, the cult's opponents --
like, e.g., Tilman -- its nature and dangers, is, on this newsgroup,
all important. How the a.r.s. participant says what he says about
Scientology is also important, e.g., as a bully or as a humble
narrator. I read your posts because of what you say and how you say
it.
In addition, Dennis states somewhere, and I think freely, that he has
no conflict with the cult, or something to that effect. If he was just
being subtly banal and simply informing everyone that he has no
current litigation, then I apologize, but it sounded to me that he was
talking about something broader, a psychophilosophic shift that moved
him toward collaboration on the relationship scale.And this would be
reflected in what he says and how he says it.
I don't think that Tilman would say, even though he also has no
current litigation with Scientology, that he has no conflict with the
cult. I do have current litigation, but I would say that I'm in
conflict with the cult, specifically because of its nature and
dangerous practices, even if that litigation ended.
Dennis also somewhere acknowledges that he reacts badly, and I think
he implied that he reacted badly equally, to both [a] cult and a
critic. I'm not a critic clearly, but it's pretty clear that Dennis
considers Tilman to be one, and some of Dennis's bad reactions
certainly are directed at him.
Presumably Dennis is not restricted in what he can say about Tilman.
He can say the meanest, indeed stupidest things and he doesn't have
to worry about Tilman enforcing some contract against him. But Dennis
cannot really react badly, as he reacts badly to Tilman, to the
Scientology cult. So his bad reactions are not equal at all, but in
the Scientology v. critics conflict, he can, apparently and possibly,
only support Scientology.
>Short of getting a Lensman-style lens from the
>ARiSians, I don't think that's going to happen.
>
>"Also, there was the apparently insuperable difficulty of the identification
>of authorized personnel. Triplanetary's best scientists had done their best
>in the way of a noncounterfeitable badge-the historic Golden Meteor, which
>upon touch impressed upon the toucher's consciousness an unpronounceable,
>unspellable symbol-but that best was not enough. What physical science could
>devise and synthesize, physical science could analyze and duplicate; and
>that analysis and duplication had caused trouble indeed."
>
>Mind you, some traces of CoS's old problems with the word X*NU crop up now
>and then. At least twice, Wikipedia edits by CoS editors have mangled links
>to xenu.net. From the look of it (coming out *INVALID*.net), it was
>accidently done by an automatic filter rather than by hand, so they might
>still have some sort of Scieno Sitter running on the INCOMM PCs that has to
>be switched off when pretending to be their current Wikipedia sock-puppet.
Scientology has really worked all right:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/ytq52u
Tilman at #1 and #2. Gargantuan congratulations!
© Gerry Armstrong
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org
RolandRB
> On Dec 31 2007, 4:44 pm, Rev Dennis L Erlich <infor...@informer.org>
> wrote:
>
> > I'm "allowed" to say anything I want, Ro. This is still America.
>
> > Dennis
>
> Then, dear Dennis, if your experience is that Scientology is a
> dangerous cult then feel free to post here that "Scientology is a
> dangerous cult". If, on the other hand, you do not feel it to be a
> dangerous cult or, shudder to think, you are covered by a gagging
> order on this matter, then feel free to treat us to your silence.
And silence is what I see so far. I find it odd that you bandy about
the term "cult", as in "cult-like behaviour" applied to posters here,
and of course you could have a point, but I don't see you bandying
about the term "cult" in your present-day posts about the Church of
Scientology. Instead, we are supposed to refer to your old posts on
that matter. I have to wonder why that might be. So some people here
indulge in cult-like behaviour and yet no mention in present time of
the cult-like behavious or cult-like nature of the Church of
Scientology in your present-day posts. And yet here you are posting to
a Scientology newsgroup and were previously posting to an ex-
Scientologists message board and yet I remember no criticism from you
on the Church of Scientology.
Dennis, this does not add up. The whole situation stinks. The
impression I get is that you are not being honest with people. That is
my gut feeling. I hope I can be proved wrong. And what worries me the
most about this is that you are running an organisation that
supposedly helps people get out of cults. That does no feel right if
you are covered by some sort of gagging order concerning the Church of
Scientology which your responses here make people suspect while you do
nothing to allay those suspicions and so restore credence to your
"ministry".
Tilman Hausherr
Years!" <ale...@verizon.net> wrote:
> A strange thing just happened on google news at 12:12 AM Jan 2
One of them is here:
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=%22Is+Dennis+Erlich+allowed+to+say+that+Scientology+is+a+harmful+cult%22&qt_s=Search+Groups
And a third one:
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=%22Then+who%3F++Fishman%3F++Scarff%3F++Some+other+turd-in-a-bottle%3F++He+should%22&qt_s=Search+Groups
--
Lermanet_com Exposing the CON for 10 Years!
> On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 18:32:35 GMT, "Lermanet_com Exposing the CON for 10
> Years!" <ale...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> A strange thing just happened on google news at 12:12 AM Jan 2
>
> One of them is here:
> http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=%22Is+Dennis+Erlich+allowed+to+say+that+Scientology+is+a+harmful+cult%22&qt_s=Search+Groups
>
> Another one:
> http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=%22You+contradict+yourself+Dennis.+You+think+no+one+notices%2C+but+they+do%22&qt_s=Search
>
> And a third one:
> http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=%22Then+who%3F++Fishman%3F++Scarff%3F++Some+other+turd-in-a-bottle%3F++He+should%22&qt_s=Search+Groups
>
>
try this url sorted by topic shows both threads gone and two page views
goes back to 3 am
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.scientology/topics
here is a paste of what I see in my browser
and here is a paste of what that fetches
View: Topic list, Topic summary Topics 1 - 30 of 277881 Older »
Sort by: Latest message, First message
Topic Rating Messages Author Date
[Click the star to watch this topic] Battlefield, Tilden, a blast from
the past 2 new of 2 barbz (2 authors) 2:17pm
[Click the star to watch this topic] ^^ Huge TITS ^^ 1 new of 1
larrybirdc...@gmail.com (1 author) 2:09pm
[Click the star to watch this topic] Wiki definition of a "Trust"
1 new of 1 Tom Klemesrud (1 author) 2:06pm
[Click the star to watch this topic] "Narconon of Georgia Assists
Concerned Black Clergy"... True, or the repeat of a 2002 lie? 1
R. Hill (1 author) 1:47pm
[Click the star to watch this topic] Both Erlich threads pulled from
google newsfeed 2 new of 3 Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over
10 years! (3 authors) 1:41pm
[Click the star to watch this topic] "J. Lo To Give Birth According To
Scientology" 1 anothersurfer...@hotmail.com (1 author) 1:28pm
[Click the star to watch this topic] Is DM a JERK? 1 new of 4
Magoo1 (3 authors) 1:28pm
[Click the star to watch this topic] fwd: Nicole Kidman interview "they
don't call me mummy" 1 Tilman Hausherr (1 author) 1:28pm
[Click the star to watch this topic] Do You Have Any Idea......
1 LagsAlot (1 author) 1:22pm
[Click the star to watch this topic] WIST©2008 2 LagsAlot (1
author) 12:55pm
[Click the star to watch this topic] Perhaps we did not remember that
hubbard was processing psychotics? 2 roger gonnet (2 authors)
12:18pm
[Click the star to watch this topic] No surprise hubbard went to the
paradise! 2 roger gonnet (2 authors) 12:11pm
[Click the star to watch this topic] Here is why Body Thetans are
superior to human beings! 1 roger gonnet (1 author) 12:06pm
[Click the star to watch this topic] When do you face it?
Scientologists are loving people who even help scum and the likes of
anti-religious extremists 2
ExteriorExteriorYippeeYip...@gmail.com (2 authors) 12:07pm
[Click the star to watch this topic] Proud to be a non-bloody non-troll
posting here. (NavyInternettoplight, don't get a heart attack heckling
and tailing me.) 2 ExteriorExteriorYippeeYip...@gmail.com (2
authors) 12:06pm
[Click the star to watch this topic]
http://www.clothserver-yhnetstore.cn/ cheap parada shoes lv shoes gucci
shoes nike shox, air max, prada handbag,lv handbag,bbc + redmomkey
hoddies ,jean a price only 27usd 1 yhnetsto...@gmail.com (1
author) 12:04pm
[Click the star to watch this topic] Turn yourselves in, anti-religious
extremists and other criminals. Criminon will give you a hand to
rehabilitate yourselves. 4 ExteriorExteriorYippeeYip...@gmail.com
(3 authors) 12:03pm
[Click the star to watch this topic] Fortune Cookie's religious message
leads to outrage 2 barbwireh...@gmail.com (2 authors) 12:02pm
[Click the star to watch this topic] You failed to embrace a volunteer
minister today 2 ExteriorExteriorYippeeYip...@gmail.com (2
authors) 12:01pm
[Click the star to watch this topic] Did you ever notice that the first
two letters in the last name of L. Ron Hubbard start with Hu, like in
Hug? 2 ExteriorExteriorYippeeYip...@gmail.com (2 authors) 11:56am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Don't be so degraded! Build up
your morals! It is much better here. 3
ExteriorExteriorYippeeYip...@gmail.com (3 authors) 11:53am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Did Hubbard study the Buddha
discourses? 1 roger gonnet (1 author) 11:51am
[Click the star to watch this topic] "Narconon Bob" arrested for
indecent exposure 5 barbwireh...@gmail.com (3 authors) 11:34am
[Click the star to watch this topic] VultureWatch Alert! - London
3 JAFAW (2 authors) 11:15am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Narconon polluting Google News
with PR 1 JAFAW (1 author) 10:54am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Top Money Making Programs To Earn
online 1 rickeymartin...@googlemail.com (1 author) 9:45am
[Click the star to watch this topic] And yet that woman threw a fish...
in Simon Bolivar 2 roger gonnet (2 authors) 9:09am
[Click the star to watch this topic] bloody trolls 2 Bruce Scott
TOK (2 authors) 8:33am
[Click the star to watch this topic] china wholesale nike jordan
sneakers WWW.21cn-shoes.COM discount gucci prada puma 1
shoes2...@gmail.com (1 author) 8:24am
and here is the NEXT page of topic view
going back to 3AM
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.scientology/topics?start=30&sa=N
[Click the star to watch this topic] Supply basketball shoe, football
shoes, clothes, hat and so on 1 jim (1 author) 7:59am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Fronts ot the criminals in
Sceintology N-P 1 Hubbard_Ship_of_fo...@hushmail.com (1 author)
7:02am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Video- Heavy Hitting truth behind
scientology cult and the sceintology posters here 1
Hubbard_Ship_of_fo...@hushmail.com (1 author) 7:00am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Auditing AKA Phony Psychiatry: The
Evils and Purpose of Scientology criminals 1
Hubbard_Ship_of_fo...@hushmail.com (1 author) 6:52am
[Click the star to watch this topic] M`I 5-Pe rsecution . B BC h2g 2
onli ne 1 eim...@lycos.com (1 author) 6:42am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Life in Universe 1
christ....@gmail.com (1 author) 6:39am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Video: Scientology Criminals Well
Destroy Anybody to Make More Money 1
Hubbard_Ship_of_fo...@hushmail.com (1 author) 6:30am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Video - $cientology Criminals Evil
to the Core- There mind-control techniques revealed 1
Hubbard_Ship_of_fo...@hushmail.com (1 author) 6:29am
[Click the star to watch this topic] How Communication with
$cientologist Pigs may Kill you 1
Hubbard_Ship_of_fo...@hushmail.com (1 author) 6:26am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Video: $cientology criminal
scumbags pose as others to destroy and hurt others 1
Hubbard_Ship_of_fo...@hushmail.com (1 author) 6:24am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Evil and Ugly: Criminal Cult of
scientotlogy Recruitment and Blackmail - Video 1
Hubbard_Ship_of_fo...@hushmail.com (1 author) 6:21am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Back by popular demand from cult:
Video of International head of scientology arrested 1
Hubbard_Ship_of_fo...@hushmail.com (1 author) 6:19am
[Click the star to watch this topic] M'I.5'Per secution , harassm ent
at work 1 emi...@hotmail.com (1 author) 5:35am
[Click the star to watch this topic] This Day in Scientology History
2008-01-02 1 Kristi Wachter (1 author) 5:03am
[Click the star to watch this topic] M-I'5-Perse cution ` w hy t he se
curity service s? 1 mifvef...@lycos.com (1 author) 4:57am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Another stupid and false way to
get "cas gains" in scientology 1 roger gonnet (1 author) 4:49am
[Click the star to watch this topic] complaint filed against Narconon
Watsonville 4 Dave Touretzky (3 authors) 4:38am
[Click the star to watch this topic] M I.5'Persecut ion wh y th e sec
urity services? 1 evemif...@lycos.com (1 author) 4:25am
[Click the star to watch this topic] M,I-5,P ersecution why th e sec
urity services? 1 ifiv...@lycos.com (1 author) 4:19am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Getting a refund from Dennis
3 Anonymous Sender (3 authors) 4:14am
[Click the star to watch this topic] M-I,5.Persecutio n . w hy t he se
curity se rvices? 1 imimi...@lycos.com (1 author) 4:05am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Scientology Loses $39 Mil Fraud
suit --- Let's see many more in 2008 - big names suing, too 1
stopsciozomb...@hushmail.com (1 author) 3:50am
[Click the star to watch this topic] 10 year olds grabbed, punshied,
isolated by Scientology 1 stopsciozomb...@hushmail.com (1
author) 3:48am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Criminal scientology 's fake
psychiatric hospital AKA prison Rehabilitation Project Force 1
stopsciozomb...@hushmail.com (1 author) 3:45am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Watch Your Back During Disasters-
scientology Volunteer Vultures lurk to take your money/life 1
stopsciozomb...@hushmail.com (1 author) 3:44am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Ruined lives. Lost fortunes.
Federal crimes carried out by scientologist cult members 1
stopsciozomb...@hushmail.com (1 author) 3:42am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Scientologists Destroying Lives
and Killing People 24-7 1 stopsciozomb...@hushmail.com (1
author) 3:41am
[Click the star to watch this topic] Deaths at Flag -- Scientology
Criminal Cult 1 stopsciozomb...@hushmail.com (1 author) 3:40am
[Click the star to watch this topic] An Exposure of the criminal cult
of scientology by a Mother 1 stopsciozomb...@hushmail.com (1
author) 3:39am
[Click the star to watch this topic] VIDEO : Scientology Criminal Thugs
Kill 1 stopsciozomb...@hushmail.com (1 author) 3:37am
31 - 60 of 277881 « Newer | Older »
and its not on the older views either
odd isnt it?
Tilman Hausherr
Years!" <ale...@verizon.net> wrote:
>try this url sorted by topic shows both threads gone and two page views
>goes back to 3 am
>
>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.scientology/topics
>
>here is a paste of what I see in my browser
Here's what I get, it has two threads with Erlich:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.scientology/topics?start=0&sa=N
Description: L. Ron Hubbard's Church of Scientology.
Topic Rating Messages Author Date
Both Erlich threads pulled from google newsfeed 8 new of 8
R. Hill (5 authors) 9:09pm
Is DM a JERK? 8 new of 8 Magoo (5 authors) 9:09pm
Did LRH ever mention his mom and dad? 18 new of 18
Gerry Armstrong (11 authors) 9:07pm
From Alexander Dvorkin in Moscow -- Alliance between Scientology
cultists and Falun Gong 1 new of 1 Gerry Armstrong
(1 author) 9:06pm
Proud to be a non-bloody non-troll posting here.
(NavyInternettoplight, don't get a heart attack heckling and tailing
me.) 3 new of 3 JAFAW (3 authors) 8:56pm
NEW Scientologists Write to Magoo~~:) 18 new of 18
Hartley Patterson (8 authors) 8:54pm
Is Dennis Erlich allowed to say..... 84 new of 84
Lermanet_com Exposing the CON for 10 Years! (23 authors) 8:41pm
Battlefield, Tilden, a blast from the past 2 new of
2 cultxpt (2 authors) 8:28pm
Spammers Roger Gonnet and the Zombieshipfoolposter (a child who
should be in bed after 8pm ) are anti-Scientologists 14 new
of 14 Red Mage Moogle (9 authors) 8:24pm
What is Dianetics? 5 new of 5 Michael (5
authors) 8:10pm
^^ Huge TITS ^^ 1 new of 1
larrybirdc...@gmail.com (1 author) 8:09pm
Wiki definition of a "Trust" 1 new of 1 Tom
Klemesrud (1 author) 8:06pm
God is in Scientology, the devil is in Usenet 14 new
of 14 Peter Widmer (7 authors) 7:54pm
"Narconon of Georgia Assists Concerned Black Clergy"... True, or
the repeat of a 2002 lie? 1 new of 1 R. Hill (1
author) 7:47pm
Impeach the Bastards! 16 new of 16 barbz (5
authors) 7:32pm
"J. Lo To Give Birth According To Scientology" 1 new of
1 anothersurfer...@hotmail.com (1 author) 7:28pm
fwd: Nicole Kidman interview "they don't call me mummy" 1 new of
1 Tilman Hausherr (1 author) 7:28pm
Do You Have Any Idea...... 1 new of 1 LagsAlot
(1 author) 7:22pm
complaint filed against Narconon Watsonville 3 new of
4 R. Hill (3 authors) 7:19pm
Question re: the Settlement Agreement in RTC and Bridge vs.
Erlich 307 new of 315 Gerry Armstrong (50 authors) 7:07pm
You failed to embrace a volunteer minister today 2 new of 2
JAFAW (2 authors) 7:01pm
WIST©2008 2 new of 2 LagsAlot (1 author)
7:00pm
Scientology officially classified as FANATICS by Swiss Canton
Police 2 new of 2 Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over
10 years! (1 author) 6:51pm
What is auditing? 5 new of 5 Lermanet.com
Exposing the CON for over 10 years! (5 authors) 6:49pm
Wikipedia locked the article on me. The Hausherr and Touretzky
supporter gang can't get the same defamation on Wikipedia again. 6 new
of 6 Red Mage Moogle (5 authors) 6:35pm
Turn yourselves in, anti-religious extremists and other
criminals. Criminon will give you a hand to rehabilitate yourselves. 4
new of 4 navy.internetoplicht...@gmail.com (3 authors) 6:35pm
VultureWatch Alert! - London 3 new of 3 JAFAW (2
authors) 6:23pm
Perhaps we did not remember that hubbard was processing
psychotics? 2 new of 2 seventhdyna...@gmail.com (2
authors) 6:21pm
Fortune Cookie's religious message leads to outrage 2 new of 2
seventhdyna...@gmail.com (2 authors) 6:18pm
No surprise hubbard went to the paradise! 2 new of
2 seventhdyna...@gmail.com (2 authors) 6:16pm
Lermanet.com Exposing the CON for over 10 years!
> On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 19:41:14 GMT, "Lermanet_com Exposing the CON for 10
>
> Years!" <ale...@verizon.net> wrote:
thnks tilman
but Ray Hill figured out the error
I had the sort first button highlighted in google.
three weeks ago, I lost my longest running pc
to a HD death...
and have been using google since.. instead
of ForteAgent for the prior 13 years.
Sorry for wasting anyones time with the
misclick.
Now...
Mr Erlich
What is scientology?
I think a lot of information has been poured out here
by everyone involved besides my old pal Dennis.
Warrior is asking:
In article <209221621.0000feeb.004.0...@drn.newsguy.com>,
Warrior asked:
>Which one? Do you have the message ID?
>Now a direct question for you: Does "ceasing hostilities" include
>your refraining from saying and/or posting that Scientology is a
>cult?
>Please understand I have not followed this discussion very closely.
Still waiting for the message ID.
Also, has the Settlement Agreement dated April 30, 1999 ever been
made public?
Warrior - Sunshine disinfects
"Scientology: it's about deception."
http://warrior.xenu.ca
RolandRB
View profile
More options Jan 2, 2:24 pm
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: RolandRB <rolandbe...@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 11:24:57 -0800 (PST)
Local: Wed, Jan 2 2008 2:24 pm
Subject: Re: Is Dennis Erlich allowed to say.....
Roland is wondering:
Dennis, this does not add up. The whole situation stinks. The
impression I get is that you are not being honest with people. That is
my gut feeling. I hope I can be proved wrong. And what worries me the
most about this is that you are running an organisation that
supposedly helps people get out of cults. That does no feel right if
you are covered by some sort of gagging order concerning the Church of
Scientology which your responses here make people suspect while you do
nothing to allay those suspicions and so restore credence to your
"ministry".
Gerry Armstrong wants to know....
Tillman Wants to know
xscientologist wants to know
but I bet we wont ever know beyond what we have dumped into this
thread...
that is What Works in Scientology
http://www.lermanet.com/silence.htm
Tilman Hausherr
for over 10 years!" <ale...@verizon.net> wrote:
>I had the sort first button highlighted in google.
>three weeks ago, I lost my longest running pc
>to a HD death...
If the PC is still useful, then get a new HD (maybe a used one on ebay,
or maybe a critic in the US has one from an old PC) and reinstall all
the stuff from backups. It's too inefficient to read a newsgroup though
google groups. The web based interface is only useful for doing searches
about topics.
Tilman
Out_Of_The_Dark
> "Tilman Hausherr" <tilman-use...@snafu.de> wrote in message
Hi Andrew,
You are like me in this sense, expecting minimal standards of good
conduct and professional etiquette from someone who is a minister.
Keep in mind that Gerry is just trying to speak realisticly in his
response to what you said on that. Dennis is presumably someone who is
really a cult victim advisor and possible deprogrammer, and hopefully
not a 'man of the clothe' so to speak.
I cringed when I first read some of Dennis's recent comments because I
am a christian first and it's always embarassing for christians to see
abuse of a title designed to be comforting; I figured that dennis
probably still has some conceptual remnants of Scientology lurking in
his universe ( which all ex members have somewhere within their
thought processes to some degree or another and at one time or
another......)
Whatever the excuse, I had no choice but to disabused myself of the
idea that, at least here on ARS, Dennis is a minister by the
standards I am accustomed to; the lack of evidence is really all I
have to go by.
It's a revered title in this here 'wog' world, so when someone uses
it, they have to know that they are going to be measured by it. That's
a fact of life. So, the decision I came to was that since Dennis does
not care what he says to anyone then what Dennis posts here cannot be
measured against the essence of the title.
Mary McConnell
RolandRB
>
> - Show quoted text -
Then let's SLIME HIM !!
I slimed Dennis Erlich.
Yeah babe! :o)
Out_Of_The_Dark
:p
Ball of Fluff
> On Jan 1, 3:18 pm, henri <he...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 21:13:35 +0100, Tilman Hausherr <tilman-use...@snafu.de>
> > wrote:
>
> > >On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 13:28:07 -0500, henri <he...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> > >>On Tue, 01 Jan 2008 17:38:52 +0100, Tilman Hausherr <tilman-use...@snafu.de>
> > >>wrote:
> > >>>Dennis can say that the "Ex Scientologist Message Board" is a cult.
> > >>He never said that. You're just lying again.
> > >You're playing with words, in your amateurish attempt to do PR for him.
>
> > Don't tell me what the fuck I'm doing, you fascist scum. I'm stating my
> > disagreement with your disgusting behavior.
>
> > If I were doing PR, I would withhold calling you the piece of shit you are,
> > and instead be "polite" about my disagreement. You dumb motherfucker.
> > "PR" that, you lying turd. < < < <
>
> Henri, If I had not read it directly from Erlich's post, it's almost
> impossible for me to believe that you could be a friend to anyone. You
> are the most hatefilled poster on this newsgroup, far exceeding
> Barbara Schwarz - who has one of the vilest when she gets going.
Actually, Henri is a long time well respected contributor to this
forum...There are people who don't care for him (and vice versa) but
believe me, he's got a lot of friends among critics.
>
> If you can't restrain yourself from being so vicious, then you need to
> crawl back under that rock where you came from and shut up.
Well, I don't think you can point fingers there. You've been rather
scathing yourself at times. (examples available upon request.)
And, really, how would you or anyone know who's killfiled Henri? I
don't think you even know who he is.
C
Rev Dennis L Erlich
arnie has turned on me and flip-flopped from being my "friend &
supporter" to being my enemy?
arnie <ale...@verizon.net> wrote:
dylan
>> >But you who philosophize disgrace and criticize all fears
yhn
>> Hey, close enough. You didn't actually have quotes around it anyway.
arn
>whether deceit or disgrace the intent and implication fit perfectly
Those who philosophize? To whom is he referring? Perhaps himself?
Hard to finger out. But this pitiful rant shows the cult's damage to
the man's sanity.
>when people ask me about you, here is what I recall
>you were the best poster on ars
>the clams wanted you to stfu
>you got raided...
>and you were'nt the first raid
>another guy, I think his name was john bostrum was raided a few years
>previously..
>and if I got the name wrong, I didnt have quotes around him either,
>few heard of his case... he committed suicide before he ever walked
>into a courtroom
>You survived your raid!
>and you got the best PRO BONO Lawfirm with the help of
>Shari Steele and Mike Godwin of EFF
>thats the Mike Godwin of Godwins Law
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
>ain't that a chuckle?
>http://www.Lermanet.com/scientology-and-occult/
>You got Morrison and Forster.. AKA MoFo
>You had a better case than I did...
If my case was "better" it was in no small part due to the fact that I
stopped having anything to do with the rest of the people like arnie,
wollersheim & keith. IMO these people jumped on the doc-posting
bandwagon for the sake of personal glory or other dubious motives.
Ever wonder why MoFo didn't also want to take them on? They actually
made my case MUCH weaker.
>and could have gone all the way, but..
It went all the way. And it could easily have gone right into the
dumpster with a Judge like Whyteman.
But of course the arm-chair peanut gallery knows better than the
attorney's at MoFo what constituted a proper defense, what would be
success and what course of action would lead to disaster.
BTW, I accepted my attorneys' advices all the way on the case.
>but what?
>You chose to live? Afford to care for your mother?
I chose to accept that I accomplished what I set out to accomplish and
to get on with the rest of my life.
>Mine died in 2000. I wish I could have done more.
And this is somehow my fault?
Sheesh. If he wanted my sympathy he should have asked for it before
this post. Now, not so much ...
>The FACT you caved in for the dough screwed a LOT of people.
The lie that I caved in for a lot of dough is something I can expect
him and the other arnists, mintonites and tilmany sliem-artists to
repeat endlessly without any attempt to prove a word of it.
This is what passes for "news" on this newsgroup now.
>And when you you came back I thought, OK
>the SOB is going to fight for his soul back...
>OK, Ill support THAT.
Like I cared. I have been expecting arnie to turn on me once again,
as he had done several times before ... and of course he's lived right
down to my expectations.
>But no
>You are fighting for hubris.
No. I'm not fighting at all. I'm yankin the ng's chain to see what
flushes out.
Oh look! There's another sliemy turd!
>You have called tilman a liar.
>Show me.
>Ive never caught him in a lie.
Heh, there seems to have developed a serious, wide-spread lack of
reading and comprehension skills on ars since I left.
>You have implied "I made it up out of whole cloth"
Oh sorry! One of the words in the "quote" was actually Dylan's. So I
guess that's not *wholly* fabricated.
>Go fuck yourself mate.
Huh. Anonyscum was arnie? I kinda thought it might be him.
>You tell Warrior whose life, unbeknowingst to many was SEVERELY
>screwed with by scientology
>because of the hieneous crime of being my friend and speaking up after
>he saw an old freind
>of his getting raided by those nazi=scientology scumballs on CNN. So
>they went after his kids.
I tell Warrior what, I wonder? (I see arnie is back to his
incompressible ranting style.)
>YOU have to tell the goddamn truth
And he thinks I'm his sockpuppet. Heh.
>You want your soul back,
>don't you?
My soul is intact and firmly in my possession. And certainly I
wouldn't seek help from the likes of arnie if I was to go looking for
it.
But it's certainly clear that arnie and others here think they have
some ownership over my soul.
>Your sell out for slavers dollars screwed US.
>and now you want us to lick your shoes?
Hey, if that's his thing ...
>Earn it you bastard
>Do the right thing
No, I'll do MY OWN thing, thanks. Just as I always have since I left
the cult.
>You could start any time.
>unsigned
Someone needs to up the dosage on his meds.
Dennis
------------------
"Kind ladies and kind gentlemen
Soon I will be gone
But let me just warn you all
Before I do pass on:
Stay free from petty jealousies
Live by no man's code
And hold your judgement for yourself
Lest you wind up on his road."- B. Dylan
Rev Dennis L Erlich
>Lets get this straight.
>Dennis says he isn't gagged. He says that it is 100% his decision to refrain from saying that Scientology is a harmful cult.
I guess I just don't like the taste of someone stickin' their words in
my mouth.
>The guy has no problem with speaking his mind. He's a tough guy. He calls 'em as he see 'em.
Yes I do, Anonyscum.
>So if he isn't gagged and has no problem with saying whats on his mind, and he's back posting on a newsgroup devoted to discussing Scientology yet he won't say Scientology is a harmful cult - there is only one conclusion to arrive at.
>HE DOESN'T THINK SCIENTOLOGY IS A HARMFUL CULT.
>WTF?
Don't pull words outta your own ass and try to put them in my mouth.
>If there is any flaw to this logic I'm sure someone will point it out, but I can't see how else it could be.
>Unless....
>He's lying.
>Either way he's playing us for fools.
It doesn't take a play. Just this short skit will prove you're a
idiot.
>Why is he here? It's obviously NOT to discuss Scientology, NOT to discuss his settlement, NOT to answer any questions that are the least bit uncomfortable. He values his privacy this lad. He's said so over and over. So why the hell is he here? To discuss finding God? That's off topic and nauseous to most people here.
>If he values his privacy, why is he posting to ars?
Wise words coming from Anonyscum. Even a stopped clock gives the
right time ... twice a day. But I guess he thinks that by my merely
posting here, I forfeit my rights.
Is it just me or does it seem this newgroup has become a sort of haven
and personal turf for a few people who think they can tell people what
they can, cannot and must say here?
Gee, where have I seen that before?
>Here is my suggestion for you Dennis. Crawl back to that Bittersquash/Greenway cabal IRC channel who protects and champions you and won't question you. That same channel you've been holed up in for 7 years doing nothing but bitching about Lerma or Minton or anyone who happens to be in their sights. There you can evade any question you like with the help of your PR guy (Henri) and your door bitch (Greenway). You can yap happily about your new car and your lovely house and your non existant ministry and no one will care. At least you aren't wasting any bandwidth doing that.
Thanks. I think I'll follow my own heart, just as I always have.
Dennis
Oh, and ps. <PLONK!>
Rev Dennis L Erlich
>But, Dennis says said that he is not silenced in anyway. As I
>understand it, he has said that there is no secret agreement, or
>contract that he has signed, with Scientology--rather he just chooses to
>not criticize them anymore, because he has done so much of it in the
>pastm and, it is a matter of protecting his privacy.
Hey, twist my words around any way you want, inebriate.
>One has to ask however if the other party to such an agreement knows
>about it, why would telling kindred spirits about the agreement impinge
>on his privacy?
Kindred spirits? Heh. You and your buds are slieming me just like
the cult did. Lies, innuendos and half-truths. (yes, I live in palm
springs)
>However when I look at it, there has to be another document to explain
>where the money came from to buy the house in Palm Springs. In the
>document that I saw online, Dennis was permanently enjoined from quoting
>a list of Scientology materials. He was also fined $69,000. I don't
>think that is the victory that Dennis was talking about. In fact that
>judgment looks like a loss to Dennis and Morrison Forrester. It seems
>to me there is another document.
Feel free to get it and post it here, lush. Or more to the style of a
few of the idiots on this newsgroup, make it up out of whole cloth.
I'd love to see what you think is being hidden.
Dennis
ps. Try sobering up, Tom.
Rev Dennis L Erlich
> Rumors Ive heard about Dennis's case
That's what the newsgroup had degraded into accepting as news. Rumor
mongering, mud-slinging, lies, innuendos and slieming. Pathetically
petty bullshit.
They actually do the cult's work for them, while endlessly pasting
their stupid rants at the end of their incomprehensibly disjointed
posts.
But hey, that's their signature style.
D
Rev Dennis L Erlich
>>The counter suit was part of the defense, twit.
>
>No it isn't. In fact, if its only purpose is defense, and you know and
>admit your cross-complaint contains no legitimate cause of action
>against the cross-defendant, it might be prima facie malicious
>prosecution.
WTF?
>IANAL, but I think I'd rethink and restate your averment
>that the counter suit was only a defensive action and not a suit
>against someone that you filed, which it is.
It's a counter-suit. So?
>Why communicate the way you do or don't, then, about the Scientology
>cult and its dangers?
Somehow you and others seem to think you have a right to tell me what
I have to do and say here. And you think you have a right to tell me
what my ministry has to do and say. It's sick really.
>I would hate to attribute even baser motives
>than conformance with a contractual agreement with the cult.
Hey pull whatever other bs outta your rectum and attribute whatever
you want.
>Your situation is similar to mine,
Not in the least. I don't have any legal obligation to anyone.
Especially not those who think they own me as their sock-puppet here.
>and I have a personal legal
>interest, in addition to the interest every Scientology victim or
>target has, in your facts and approach, and have been reading your
>posts since you arrived on a.r.s. a few weeks ago.
So?
>I've also been reading Tilman's posts recently, and for many years,
>and I believe, from what I've seen, that he has conducted himself
>honorably and reasonably in his exchanges with you, and that your
>reactions to him have been unwarranted and bullying.
Yah, as if I'm bullying him. That's laughable. It's not me that's
telling everyone what they must or must not say in order to pass their
Loyalty Oath test.
>You identify what you've been doing as "reacting badly" to Tilman's
>communications, and I think that this recognition is probably a good
>first step to doing something other than react badly.
I'm reacting appropriately to some ugly slieming being sent my way by
those who have no regard for the truth and only can toss lies and
innuendos at me, expecting me to crack under the pressure.
From their responses, it's pretty clear to me who's cracked up.
>If reacting as
>badly as you've been reacting is what you really want to do, then
>definitely disregard my suggestion.
Count on it.
>But what, that the suit was settled? You say it I believe, and in fact
>say, to me rather ominiously, that you have no conflict with the
>Scientology cult.
I don't.
>Didn't you collect anything from the cult? Are you just being nuttily
>evasive?
I collected an Injunction.
>> He
>>wouldn't dare fling baseless accusations. Not him. I guess he needs
>>to get a warrant for my financial records and prove his allegations
>>that way. But someone should tell him this isn't a fascist country.
>
>That kind of communication is bullying, and if it makes any difference
>to you, stupid.
Nobody on this newsgroup or anywhere else owns me. Nobody on this
newsgroup is going to bully me into anything. Anyone who is trying to
do so is acting like they own me, just like any other fascist would.
>There are things you could do for free, but you just don't like doing
>any of them. Is that what you mean?
I mean the things my ministry has done and continues to do for
individuals, we do for free. We have been paid by the City of Los
Angeles and by the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce to produce various
events. That's the only pay we've gotten from "anyone" for services.
Dennis
Tom Klemesrud
So Dennis you are saying that posting public court documents, the truth
about the litigations, somehow hurt your case? I thought the truth
about what went on in the courts would set you free? By the way it was
me who started posting all the documents to the Internet through the
Electronic Frontier Foundation. Would you have rather have these public
court documents secret, and hidden from the public? If so, why?
What dubious motives do you attribute to people like Arnie, Wollersheim,
and Keith Henson? Do you think they were out for the money?
> Ever wonder why MoFo didn't also want to take them on? They actually
> made my case MUCH weaker.
>
>
>>and could have gone all the way, but..
>
>
> It went all the way. And it could easily have gone right into the
> dumpster with a Judge like Whyteman.
No Dennis, it did not go all the way. It apparently ended in a secret
settlement, where the judges order of a permanent injunction that made
it look like you and Morrison Forrester lost the case--no fair use. No
counter claims, and you pay a fine and $69,000. Now we all know
that's not how it came out... but then you're the only one who could
tell us that. And for some unknown reason, you're not saying, even
though you say legally, you could if you wanted to.
>
> But of course the arm-chair peanut gallery knows better than the
> attorney's at MoFo what constituted a proper defense, what would be
> success and what course of action would lead to disaster.
Well we'll have to take your word for that because judging by the final
judgment of the Court it looks like you both lost. And, the above
described people that you say may have hurt your case were also in
litigation with the same cult.
>
> BTW, I accepted my attorneys' advices all the way on the case.
Okay then, Morrison Forrester suggested then that you settle the case
secretly without your fair use rights intact. At least you are giving
us some information here. But, I don't know why they wouldn't want to
go to trial because you have a good case: not only was most of their
copyrights of questionable validity, but given the 500,000 pages that L.
Ron Hubbard wrote your one or two pages of use would be considered fair
use by any jury.
>
>>but what?
>>You chose to live? Afford to care for your mother?
>
>
> I chose to accept that I accomplished what I set out to accomplish and
> to get on with the rest of my life.
But, what did you set out to accomplish?
>
>
>>Mine died in 2000. I wish I could have done more.
>
>
> And this is somehow my fault?
Nelle Arnie was just saying that it was tough on him to. And his went
to trial and accomplished something in court that made the cult look
very foolish. That is something that you did not do, even though you
could have.
>
> Sheesh. If he wanted my sympathy he should have asked for it before
> this post. Now, not so much ...
>
>
>>The FACT you caved in for the dough screwed a LOT of people.
>
>
> The lie that I caved in for a lot of dough is something I can expect
> him and the other arnists, mintonites and tilmany sliem-artists to
> repeat endlessly without any attempt to prove a word of it.
It's largely unprovable Dennis, because somebody made a settlement in
secret... and the only explanation for that can be for some sort of quid
pro quo. Of course news of it getting it out as quickly as the next
cult member who deserts the sinking ship gets on the web. So what seems
to be unprovable may not be that way forever.
>
> This is what passes for "news" on this newsgroup now.
Yes it does Dennis--it does pass for news. For this is that newsgroup
concerning the Scientology cult. And people want it to stay that way.
The people don't want to turn it into a noncritical name-calling
irreverent reverend swearing, cursing, and calling people bad names
like Nazi and Fascist. And I don't think you and Robert Clark have the
political capital, and/or rhetorical skills to turn it into that.
Tom Klemesrud
Geez Dennis I am sober. I guess you're going to start attacking me now
too. I cannot help but wonder if you have an ulterior motive to try to
trash this whole critical newsgroup, and dumb it down to a profane
soirée of angry people propitiating the belief that life is cheap and so
are we.
Out_Of_The_Dark
You have some nerve. You run here from another group, bitching and
moaning about how badly you were treated there, get all sorts of
conflict going between that group and people here, & then get your
pitbull ' Henri ' out of his cage to do your real dirty work while
you continue to pretend you are a righteous man who is accountable to
no one. When finally the readers' light bulbs start going on and they
start asking you specific questions and you can't or won't give a
straight answer under the guise of FREE SPEECH, you then attack people
for expressing their outrage when they figure out what a lowlife
traitor you turned out to be after all.
There is a place for you. Right where you said you've been the past 10
years. With the crew of pseudocritics who have nothing better to do
than gossip and natter about posters - people who are still here and
doing things things to help others get out of scientology despite the
attacks from the cult and attacks from the likes of you and your
friends. You don't have an ounce of the integrity that Tom, Arnie,
Gerry and Keith have.
You've been hard at work for your money. You created a distraction
here and intentionally so. Your calling 'Henri' / Rob Clark your good
friend explains alot about who you really are. You should be ashamed
of yourself for coming here and treating posters the way you have but
you are not who people thought you were and you are too proud to know
the humility necessary.
You, Dennis Erlich, are a scientology-made man and you stink.
Out_Of_The_Dark
You are too kind, Tom. He already attacked you. For some unstated
reason, his motives are highly questionable and I am sorry to see that
he attacked you, of all people.