from a friend of phil gale's
m brian ladner
after receiving email about the phil gale memorial website, for which i
am deeply grateful to its caretaker, i spent an hour or so reading
through all the posts concerning phil and his connection to scientology.
i must admit, i was amazed, and feel phil would be somewhat amused, by
all the speculation caused by his death, the date upon which he chose to
end it all, and the ensuing fallout throughout the net community.
i worked closely with phil at earthlink from october 95 until his
departure back to MIT. in that time, we became what i consider to be
close friends. we connected professionally, academically, and
socially. he had been and would become further interested in my chosen
field of graduate study, cognitive science. we talked about that, about
programming, about women, about music, about whatever... it was only
after getting to know him well that i found out that he ever was a
scientologist, as just previous to our meeting that phil seriously
questioned and abandoned scientology, if not publically, at least
privately.
although i too was shaken by the news of his suicide, it was not
altogether surprising. he, like many other 'child prodigies,' had
problems understanding and communicating in the world in which he found
himself. moreover, he was easily bored and always restless -- mentally,
physically, and emotionally.
he was no more reclusive than most very bright people--a reclusivity
borne of necessity, not genetics. his, like those of other brilliant
people, was a strange world, where he 'had to behave; in a way not
really befitting his chronological age, but more like those around him.
being technically brilliant made it all the harder--he seemed removed
from those around him differing both in age and in knowledge. so
although we were good friends, i would not understand something he had
said or done, because, as he often put it, i was generation X, he was
generation "why?".
far and away, he was the most brilliant, most intuitive programmer i
have ever met, so even amongst his 'peers,' which i consider myself
lucky to be branded by him, he really had no peer. it was often hard to
discern and even harder to remember that, at heart, he was just a
teenager, plagued with all the normal teenage anxieties as well as those
thrust upon him by the demands of a world in need of his talents. and
when it came to discussing his thoughts about scientology, he had few
around who knew it anywhere near the level he did, having been brought
up believing it was the only way. beyond the first questioning of the
belief system handed you by your parents upon entering college, i could
help no further, not having been scientologist myself.
one thing is sure, however--he left scientology long before departing
earthlink. the long lasting effects, who knows. my own survival to the
ripe old age of 32 is no testament to the benefits nor a condemnation of
modern psychiatry for 'child prodigies,' but rather a failure of my own
self-destructive impulses to succeed on their terms.
and although he may have left scientology, it is unclear as to whether
or not it left him. in the end, who knows? it was i who first
introduced him to the church of the subgenius when i bought him a copy
of 'Revelation X' -- a discovery waiting to happen. he fell in love
with it immediately, and read it in far more detail than i ever did.
what that says about his need to find a new belief system i can only
hazard a guess -- he had found comfort in numbers. it was a comfort
hard to share, but share he did, even in the so-called 'scientology
days' of earthlink, which to the best of my knowledge lasted not much
longer than phil did at earthlink, if that long. yeah, its effects are
still felt in subtle ways, but the management methodology itself was
gone, at least in the information technologies group, long before i
departed in january of 97.
but i digress.
as for what phil was thinking that night, why he chose friday the 13th,
"elron's" birthday, as he would say, to end his life, and many other
questions for which there may be answers to me are just the legacy of
what it was like to be phil. as misunderstood as he seemed in life, so
he remains in the afterlife--a statement of what only phil really knows,
the rest of us have to guess.
thanx again to everyone involved in keeping his memory alive. it is a
gesture he himself took on for his dad after his death. after returning
from the services, phil sent an email explaining the growing number of
'x' files in directories on various servers around earthlink. it was a
testament to his dad, who, always in need of someplace to temporarily
store some information, used files he named he named 'x'.
for phil, an 'x'-file of your own:
> ls /
x
brian ladner
lad...@usweb.com
Steve A
> gesture he himself took on for his dad after his death. after returning
> from the services, phil sent an email explaining the growing number of
> 'x' files in directories on various servers around earthlink. it was a
> testament to his dad, who, always in need of someplace to temporarily
> store some information, used files he named he named 'x'.
>
> for phil, an 'x'-file of your own:
>
> > ls /
> x
I like this. I think I'll rename my main Scn saved-posts directory to
x. Less typing, too :-)
Practicing medicine without a licence? You decide.
"Step Four - Cures for Illness
You will now find BTs and clusters being cures for illnesses of the body
part. Handle all such BTs and clusters by blowing them off. "Cures for
Illness" will then cease to read. [NOTS 34, Fair Use excerpt]
--
Steve A, SP4, GGBC, KBM, Unsalvageable PTS/SP #12
"...Your suppositions include an unwarranted accusation which
I do not consider myself called upon to address..."
- a nice line in diplomatic put-down from Swedish
A/G in response to letter of Warren McShane
tall...@mail.storm.ca
In article <35230B...@w3-design.com>, m brian ladner
<lad...@w3-design.com> wrote:
<Snip. Read it now, all the way through.>
When someone dies, especially by their own hand, it is only human to attempt
to find meaning and significance, both to 'explain' away such a seemingingly
irrational and random act and to reassure ourselves that it will not happen to
ourselves, or to someone close to us. We look for someone - or something - to
blame, to forestall those dark thoughts in the wee hours of the morning, when
in our minds, the question turns from 'why?' to 'why not?'
Marie Gale seems to have done that through her accusatory post blaming a.r.s.,
the Herald and criticism of scientology for her son's decision to end his
life. I believe she was very very wrong, but it was the wrongness of a
grieving mother, so I did not feel the need to challenge her speculation,
though I appreciate those who responded to her post without hurling back
accusations of their own.
And it is that to which it comes down; for me, that is. I did not know Philip
Gale, and even if I had, I doubt I would be able to point my finger at
something. some element of his life, and say with assurance that it was to
blame for his death. We are complex beings, we humans - more loose ends than
not; non-linear, tangential and filled with contradictions.
Did Philip's background in scientology affect the course of his life? I'm sure
it did - as did his intellect, his love for music and technology, and a
thousand other incidental passions that we will never get the chance to know.
There are some questions without answers. Some subplots are never resolved.
Life is strange and sudden; death doubly so.
I ask those who would add Philip Gale's name to the list of those killed by
scientology -- don't judge too fast. As Philip's friends come forward - as
this one did, though perhaps without such eloquence - more has been revealed,
although as always, in the revelations there are sometimes more questions than
answers. To those who would affix his name to picket signs, or make of him a
martyr - please don't. Don't let his seemingly senseless death turn this boy's
life into a battleground between warring agendas. He deserves to rest in peace
- if, indeed, a restless soul can ever find real peace.
And to the author of this post - thank you. You have given those of us who did
not know Philip Gale some insight into who he was - as a person, not as a
statistic, not as a posterboy; not a cause celebre or a name in a news story,
but a person, as inexplicable and ineffable as any of us. Keep your 'x-files'
and your memories alive.
K
Keith Henson
m brian ladner (lad...@w3-design.com) wrote:
Thank you very much Brian for the moving tribute to Phil Gale.
snip
: i worked closely with phil at earthlink from october 95 until his
: departure back to MIT. in that time, we became what i consider to be
: close friends. we connected professionally, academically, and
: socially.
snip
: although i too was shaken by the news of his suicide, it was not
: altogether surprising. he, like many other 'child prodigies,' had
: problems understanding and communicating in the world in which he found
: himself. moreover, he was easily bored and always restless -- mentally,
: physically, and emotionally.
To answer the question of "why are people not smarter," very high and very
low intelligence are *both* associated with reduced reproductive success,
including outright failure to survive.
If this were not so, the intelligence curve would drift up or down until
individuals out on both ends *were* being trimmed equally.
: he was no more reclusive than most very bright people--a reclusivity
: borne of necessity, not genetics. his, like those of other brilliant
: people, was a strange world, where he 'had to behave; in a way not
: really befitting his chronological age, but more like those around him.
Of all current communties, the hacker (original meaning) community is
perhaps the most supportive of highly intelligent characters who would be
outcasts elsewhere. Still, it is obvious from what you say that even here
he was exceptional.
: being technically brilliant made it all the harder--he seemed removed
: from those around him differing both in age and in knowledge. so
: although we were good friends, i would not understand something he had
: said or done, because, as he often put it, i was generation X, he was
: generation "why?".
: far and away, he was the most brilliant, most intuitive programmer i
: have ever met, so even amongst his 'peers,' which i consider myself
: lucky to be branded by him, he really had no peer. it was often hard to
: discern and even harder to remember that, at heart, he was just a
: teenager, plagued with all the normal teenage anxieties as well as those
: thrust upon him by the demands of a world in need of his talents.
and
: when it came to discussing his thoughts about scientology, he had few
: around who knew it anywhere near the level he did, having been brought
: up believing it was the only way.
<grits teeth> The combination of brilliance and full indoctrination with
Hubbard's madness from an early age . . . . Do you know if he was up on
the concepts of memetics? I have theorized that knowledge of memes
(replication information patterns with a relation to humans much like
computer viruses have to computers) might provide some degree intellectual
override on them.
beyond the first questioning of the
: belief system handed you by your parents upon entering college, i could
: help no further, not having been scientologist myself.
: one thing is sure, however--he left scientology long before departing
: earthlink. the long lasting effects, who knows. my own survival to the
: ripe old age of 32 is no testament to the benefits nor a condemnation of
: modern psychiatry for 'child prodigies,' but rather a failure of my own
: self-destructive impulses to succeed on their terms.
: and although he may have left scientology, it is unclear as to whether
: or not it left him. in the end, who knows? it was i who first
: introduced him to the church of the subgenius when i bought him a copy
: of 'Revelation X' -- a discovery waiting to happen. he fell in love
: with it immediately, and read it in far more detail than i ever did.
: what that says about his need to find a new belief system i can only
: hazard a guess -- he had found comfort in numbers. it was a comfort
: hard to share, but share he did, even in the so-called 'scientology
: days' of earthlink,
To find this out you have to ask people like Robert Anton Wilson, but
scientology and the SubGenius are memeticly related, both having elements
in them from Crowley's OTO. There are massive difference, of course.
Hubbard beat all the humor out of scientology where the SubGenius is based
on humor. The SubGenius "religion" is a placeholder, with the effect of
making it hard for any religion like meme to take root in a mind exposed
to the 'cult of "Bob."'
Your description makes me wonder if there was a memetic displacement at
Earthlink--and if Phil was the seed for it.
which to the best of my knowledge lasted not much
: longer than phil did at earthlink, if that long. yeah, its effects are
: still felt in subtle ways, but the management methodology itself was
: gone, at least in the information technologies group, long before i
: departed in january of 97.
: but i digress.
Perhaps, but thank you.
: as for what phil was thinking that night, why he chose friday the 13th,
: "elron's" birthday, as he would say, to end his life, and many other
: questions for which there may be answers to me are just the legacy of
: what it was like to be phil. as misunderstood as he seemed in life, so
: he remains in the afterlife--a statement of what only phil really knows,
: the rest of us have to guess.
My guess is that we will eventually have a better, if not a full
understanding, of what goes wrong in people like Phil. My bet is that the
understanding will be based on brain functions and things like dopamine
receptors. Already there is considerable correlation between subtypes of
dopamine receptors and a number of behavioral traits--such as addiction
to nicotine. Question, did Phil smoke?
: thanx again to everyone involved in keeping his memory alive.
Thank you for what I consider the most interesting contribution to date.
Keith Henson
it is a
: gesture he himself took on for his dad after his death. after returning
: from the services, phil sent an email explaining the growing number of
: 'x' files in directories on various servers around earthlink. it was a
: testament to his dad, who, always in need of someplace to temporarily
: store some information, used files he named he named 'x'.
: for phil, an 'x'-file of your own:
: > ls /
: x
: brian ladner
: lad...@usweb.com
Tilman Hausherr
In <35230B...@w3-design.com>, m brian ladner <lad...@w3-design.com>
wrote:
>although i too was shaken by the news of his suicide, it was not
>altogether surprising. he, like many other 'child prodigies,' had
>problems understanding and communicating in the world in which he found
>himself. moreover, he was easily bored and always restless -- mentally,
>physically, and emotionally.
I had a suspicion, that maybe the world wasn't challenging enough to
him, I've heard this happens with extremely intelligent people in
"normal" schools. This would certainly apply to Delphi (you lose time
with dictionaries and success stories instead of learning), but not to
MIT. I've not been there - but how can one be "bored" at *that* place?
Or was he a genius and autist at the same time? Or a genius but
depressed too????
>and although he may have left scientology, it is unclear as to whether
>or not it left him. in the end, who knows? it was i who first
>introduced him to the church of the subgenius when i bought him a copy
>of 'Revelation X' -- a discovery waiting to happen. he fell in love
>with it immediately, and read it in far more detail than i ever did.
Coool! I could not even finish with pamphlet nr. 1 - I laugh too much.
What I also wonder is why he never contacted me. He was listed as
scientologist on my "pro scientology" page, and people have contacted me
to be removed (some were). If he ever searched for his own name on a
search engine, he would have found... on the other hand, he never
updated his WWW page, so maybe he didn't surf very much.
Since you worked with him at earthlink, you might answer me a question.
Different people / companies all claim that they wrote TotalAccess, and
no one credits another. I assume PG really did. What about the others,
who also claim *they* wrote it?
- Sky Dayton
- Spry, Inc
- Expansion Software, Inc
>thanx again to everyone involved in keeping his memory alive. it is a
I'm sure he would have loved your post. Hey, even Marie Gale would have
liked it :-)
thanks
Tilman
x
--
Tilman Hausherr [KoX, SP4]
til...@berlin.snafu.de http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/#cos
Resistance is futile. You will be enturbulated. Xenu always prevails.
Find broken links on your web site: http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/xenulink.html
Annoy scientology by buying books: http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/bookstore.html
Rebecca Hartong
Tilman Hausherr wrote in message <354dbfb7...@news.snafu.de>...
>Or was he a genius and autist at the same time? Or a genius but
>depressed too????
That seems likely to me. Depression is apparently an equal-opportunity
mental illness. It doesn't care if you're a genius or an imbecile,
fabulously wealthy or desperately poor.
I think we usually go astray when we look for "reasons" why a person commits
suicide. Most of the time, the reason is that the person is mentally ill
with depression. Depression isn't necessarily caused by anything other than
(probably) genetically vulnerable brain chemistry. It's easy to be misled,
though, into thinking things like 'he killed himself because he was bored,'
'he killed himself because his girlfriend left him,' or 'he killed himself
because he was doing poorly in a class.' Usually, the reason for why a
person was bored, or jilted or failing in school is the *same* reason why
they eventually commit suicide: depression.
Ron Newman
In article <hkhensonE...@netcom.com>, hkhe...@netcom.com (Keith
Henson) wrote:
> My guess is that we will eventually have a better, if not a full
> understanding, of what goes wrong in people like Phil. My bet is that the
> understanding will be based on brain functions and things like dopamine
> receptors. Already there is considerable correlation between subtypes of
> dopamine receptors and a number of behavioral traits--such as addiction
> to nicotine. Question, did Phil smoke?
I believe so. There is a small, makeshift memorial to him near
the southeast corner of Building 54, near the spot where he landed
after jumping. Among the items taped to a light pole there are a
Star Market matchbook and a pack of Camel cigarettes.
--
Ron Newman rne...@thecia.net
http://www2.thecia.net/users/rnewman/
Ex Mudder
In article <35230B...@w3-design.com>, m brian ladner
<lad...@w3-design.com> wrote:
>
>although i too was shaken by the news of his suicide, it was not
>altogether surprising. he, like many other 'child prodigies,' had
>problems understanding and communicating in the world in which he found
>himself. moreover, he was easily bored and always restless -- mentally,
>physically, and emotionally.
>
>borne of necessity, not genetics. his, like those of other brilliant
>people, was a strange world, where he 'had to behave; in a way not
>really befitting his chronological age, but more like those around him.
>from those around him differing both in age and in knowledge. so
>although we were good friends, i would not understand something he had
>said or done, because, as he often put it, i was generation X, he was
>generation "why?".
Interesting.
For much of my life, until my early 20s, I was described in a
similar way (but I have no idea if I was as bright as Phil - I went to
Harvey Mudd at 17, not MIT at 15) - a few years ahead intellectually,
a few years behind socially. Turns out that my intelligence was not
the cause of my restlessness, boredom, reclusive, etc - it was a
genetically inherited depression. First treated my Prozac, then
Zolaft.
Of course, while Zolaft made me better able to deal with life, I
still had to get my cancer diagnosed and treated before I could get on
with my life.
One reason, in my case, I never considered myself "depressed" is
that I never felt suicidal. It was more the listlessness of someone
who doesn't fell the effort is worth it.
Now I have no idea if Phil was neurochemically depressed, but I do
know that if he was, his Mom's being head of CCHR which ran the suit
against Eli Lily to ban Prozac would mean even if he tried it, it
would have just contributed to his stress when his mom found out.
<shrug>
Do you know if he displayed an aversion to Psychiatry? Even when
children break from their parents faiths, some of the training (sex is
bad, psych is bad) is harder to break.
p/m
Christopher Leithiser
Rebecca Hartong wrote:
>
> Tilman Hausherr wrote in message <354dbfb7...@news.snafu.de>...
>
> >Or was he a genius and autist at the same time? Or a genius but
> >depressed too????
>
> That seems likely to me. Depression is apparently an equal-opportunity
> mental illness. It doesn't care if you're a genius or an imbecile,
> fabulously wealthy or desperately poor.
>
I think there's actually a genetic link between genius and depression,
or at least between depression and facility with words. (wgert and
Justin must, by extension, be as happy as clams.) The way I picture it,
intelligence and particularly language is a very recent addition to the
software--in other words, we're all running beta code here, folks, and
from the looks of it, a Microsoft product of some sort.
> I think we usually go astray when we look for "reasons" why a person commits
> suicide. Most of the time, the reason is that the person is mentally ill
> with depression. Depression isn't necessarily caused by anything other than
> (probably) genetically vulnerable brain chemistry. It's easy to be misled,
> though, into thinking things like 'he killed himself because he was bored,'
> 'he killed himself because his girlfriend left him,' or 'he killed himself
> because he was doing poorly in a class.' Usually, the reason for why a
> person was bored, or jilted or failing in school is the *same* reason why
> they eventually commit suicide: depression.
Something like the popularly-believed link between the full moon and,
well, lunatic behavior. The behavior came first; the link is found only
because someone is looking for a facile explanation.
That's the worst part of the $cientologists' war on psychiatry: it
wastes the best and brightest of our population to allow them to die
from preventable, chemical imbalance. On the order of saving pennies by
allowing children to go unvaccinated.
Rebecca Hartong
Christopher Leithiser wrote in message <3523E1...@bc.cc.ca.us>...
>I think there's actually a genetic link between genius and depression,
>or at least between depression and facility with words. (wgert and
>Justin must, by extension, be as happy as clams.)
Or perhaps it's just that those who are good at expressing themselves are,
likewise, better at explaining their mood. It may not be that only smart
people get depressed (I know that's not what you were claiming) but, rather,
only that smart people are better able to compartmentalize their thoughts
well enough to identify the source of their problem as depression.
> The way I picture it,
>intelligence and particularly language is a very recent addition to the
>software--in other words, we're all running beta code here, folks, and
>from the looks of it, a Microsoft product of some sort.
LOL!!!
Rebecca Hartong
http://www.erols.com/hartong
Wolf
Having watched with interest the initial pack-like mentality of ars in
attempting to link Phil Gale's suicide to CofS, I am, like most of you,
pleased that friends of his have come forward to stand up for Phil. In
essence, what they have said is that Phil was not under the thrall of
Scienology or any other ideology. Given his apparent interest in the
Subgenius material it would be just as easy for a pack of anti-Bob
crusaders to latch onto that as the source of his decision.
Keith Henson accurately points towards memes as an area of contemplation
to further understand suicide and Tallulagh asks that ars reduce it's
rabid frothing and finger-pointing in this case out of respect for a
young man who met an end only he might have understood.
And now, it seems, the post mortum has begun. ARS will mulch through a
discussion of prozac vs. BT's and the ludicrous attacks by CofS on
psychiatry and, as always, end up right back where it started: with the
spreading of the "clam meme" and the stupidity of the "we're right,
they're wrong" tautology. How long before boring threads discussing
other suicides dominate the group? Though suicide is a rare event from
within the ranks of CofS, I see no reason why the more vehement amongst
you shouldn't trot the Quinton mystery out again.
The only thing I'm curious about - now that it's obvious that the ars
androids can't hang Phil Gale's death on CofS is - how long before CofS
is blamed here for not preventing his suicide.
Keep up the good work friends, remember, Hubbard was bright enough to
realize that you only stop expanding when no body is talking about you
any longer.
Wolf
Christopher Leithiser
Rebecca Hartong wrote:
>
> Christopher Leithiser wrote in message <3523E1...@bc.cc.ca.us>...
>
> >I think there's actually a genetic link between genius and depression,
> >or at least between depression and facility with words. (wgert and
> >Justin must, by extension, be as happy as clams.)
>
> Or perhaps it's just that those who are good at expressing themselves are,
> likewise, better at explaining their mood. It may not be that only smart
> people get depressed (I know that's not what you were claiming) but, rather,
> only that smart people are better able to compartmentalize their thoughts
> well enough to identify the source of their problem as depression.
>
A friend of mine claims that it actually is only intelligent people who
get depressed, because they're the ones who realize that life really
_does_ suck, and that there's not a lot which can be done from this
angle to change that. But I really do believe that, if one did the
standard depression-scale tests on a large population, followed by the
standard "intelligence" tests (note the use of quotes) that you'd find a
correlation.
(Depending, of course, on how hard you look--remember the Law of Fives)
:)
Keith Henson
Ron Newman (rne...@thecia.net) wrote:
: In article <hkhensonE...@netcom.com>, hkhe...@netcom.com (Keith
: Henson) wrote:
: > My guess is that we will eventually have a better, if not a full
: > understanding, of what goes wrong in people like Phil. My bet is that the
: > understanding will be based on brain functions and things like dopamine
: > receptors. Already there is considerable correlation between subtypes of
: > dopamine receptors and a number of behavioral traits--such as addiction
: > to nicotine. Question, did Phil smoke?
: I believe so. There is a small, makeshift memorial to him near
: the southeast corner of Building 54, near the spot where he landed
: after jumping. Among the items taped to a light pole there are a
: Star Market matchbook and a pack of Camel cigarettes.
Thank you Ron. Keith Henson
Ex Mudder
In article <6g0ohm$7...@enews4.newsguy.com>, "Rebecca Hartong"
<har...@erols.com> wrote:
>Christopher Leithiser wrote in message <3523E1...@bc.cc.ca.us>...
>
>>I think there's actually a genetic link between genius and depression,
>>or at least between depression and facility with words. (wgert and
>>Justin must, by extension, be as happy as clams.)
>
>Or perhaps it's just that those who are good at expressing themselves are,
>likewise, better at explaining their mood. It may not be that only smart
>people get depressed (I know that's not what you were claiming) but, rather,
>only that smart people are better able to compartmentalize their thoughts
>well enough to identify the source of their problem as depression.
I think it more likely that people with mood disorders tend to get
into the field of art both as a way to express their feelings and
because it is a way to "work" where you don;t have to keep regular
hours, interact with people too much, etc. - all of which can be hard
for someone with an emotional disorder.
Not that I support the idea that you have to be miserable to be a
good artist.
I also know that I have had a side effect from Prozac that other
people have noticed - I no longer like to sit and write down my
thoughts. Some people have mentioned (try a.s.s.prozac) that they
lost the desire to write - to themselves in journals, to friends in
letters, etc - when their depression went away. And while they and I
do miss that, it isn't worth going back to the way we were for most of
the people I have talked with.
Wolf
Nico Garcia wrote:
>
> In article <3523F7...@micron.net>, Wolf <wolf...@micron.net> wrote:
>
> >The only thing I'm curious about - now that it's obvious that the ars
> >androids can't hang Phil Gale's death on CofS is - how long before CofS
> >is blamed here for not preventing his suicide.
>
You see Nico, there's that 'clam' meme you've been stricken with. Rather
than read what I actually said, your programming automatically
identifies anything that you don't like as being 'clam-powered'
> solid questions, such as "why did he jump on L. Ron Hubbard's birthday",
Believe it or not, March 13th is just another day. It's you and the rest
of the chorus who decided to attach that particular significance.
> he grew up with as a 4th generation $cientologist) and reality (such as he
> learned about at MIT and the rest of the real world) have?
I'm pretty sure there are not yet any 4th generation Scientologists of
that age. Give it another 20 years or so and you'll be correct though.
As for reality vs CofS or MIT or the view from your bathroom, stridently
denying that a reality other than the one you accept is somehow less, is
the basis of what ARS attacks CofS on in the first place.
> >Keep up the good work friends, remember, Hubbard was bright enough to
> >realize that you only stop expanding when nobody is talking about you
> >any longer.
>
> And bright enough to invent space aliens stuck to us as the source
> of all our bad thoughts and illnesses and call it "science", when
> even his own experiments on "clears" failed miserably.
You'll find little disagreement from me on that count Nico. But they do
smile a lot and they photograph so nicely.
> It's still reasonable to ask questions about Mr. Gale's fate, and to remember
> that even an incredibly brilliant person, exposed to $cientology all his life,
> can die of suicide and have his mother blame the people who exposed her
> fraudulent cult for his death.
And your point is what? That he committed suicide because of (pick
one)-> ARS? Scientology? His mother's activities against psychiatry? The
shock of reality (as per Nico) when he entered the real world (as
defined by Nico)?
The fact is, ARS and the bleating sheep who parrot one another's posts
endlessly, love a good death. It lends a air of gravity to the
'mission', so-to-speak, of ridding earth of that horrible clam-church.
Young Mr. Gale and the circumstances of his death have apparently little
or nothing to do with either ARS or Scientology.
When you people stop ranting about Xenu and BT's and calling people
clams and carrying on about dead dogs and other meaningless crap, you
might make some progress. The arrogance of ARS since it's inception,
that it has unmasked the church (as if CofS had never before been
attacked or unmasked until the internet came along) is stupid. CofS has
a long history of withstanding assualt and has rarely had it's walls
breached. ARS is not even close to shutting the church down. And it
won't get close as long as the focus is on name calling and hyperbole.
I'm pretty sure DM and his henchmen read ARS for grins... while lounging
about drinking 75 year old scotch and smoking Cubans. And why shouldn't
they like this forum? It keeps the name out there and most people who
lurk through here don't get the jokes.
Wolf
Nico Garcia
>The only thing I'm curious about - now that it's obvious that the ars
>androids can't hang Phil Gale's death on CofS is - how long before CofS
>is blamed here for not preventing his suicide.
Wait a sec, clam-droid. While many tossed out accusations, many also raised
solid questions, such as "why did he jump on L. Ron Hubbard's birthday", and
what effect did the grinding distinction between $cientology's claims (which
he grew up with as a 4th generation $cientologist) and reality (such as he
learned about at MIT and the rest of the real world) have? And did his
mother's role as head of the CCHR, $cientology's anti-psychiatry front group,
have on his health or any attempts he might have made to seek help?
>Keep up the good work friends, remember, Hubbard was bright enough to
>realize that you only stop expanding when no body is talking about you
>any longer.
And bright enough to invent space aliens stuck to us as the source
of all our bad thoughts and illnesses and call it "science", when
even his own experiments on "clears" failed miserably.
It's still reasonable to ask questions about Mr. Gale's fate, and to remember
that even an incredibly brilliant person, exposed to $cientology all his life,
can die of suicide and have his mother blame the people who exposed her
fraudulent cult for his death.
--
Nico Garcia
ra...@tiac.net
<PGP is obviously a good idea: look at who objects to it.>
Nico Garcia
In article <354dbfb7...@news.snafu.de>,
Tilman Hausherr <til...@berlin.snafu.de> wrote:
>In <35230B...@w3-design.com>, m brian ladner <lad...@w3-design.com>
>wrote:
>
>>although i too was shaken by the news of his suicide, it was not
>>altogether surprising. he, like many other 'child prodigies,' had
>>problems understanding and communicating in the world in which he found
>>himself. moreover, he was easily bored and always restless -- mentally,
>>physically, and emotionally.
>
>him, I've heard this happens with extremely intelligent people in
>"normal" schools. This would certainly apply to Delphi (you lose time
>with dictionaries and success stories instead of learning), but not to
>MIT. I've not been there - but how can one be "bored" at *that* place?
>depressed too????
Bored at MIT? Not freaking likely, and only if he chose to be. There are so
*many* things available to do and be there that it can be very difficult to
select. It's also quite hard to be challenged academically for the first time
in your life: this is one reason the freshman year is Pass/Fail, so students
unused to getting other than an A without studying at some modest school can
get accustomed to getting a D if they don't work.
There are also huge social challenges for all kids in college: these
are, IMHO, tougher for someone entering early, or who comes from a very
different culture. And let's face it, being that brilliant is effectively
a very different culture, a culture of one.
>>and although he may have left scientology, it is unclear as to whether
>>or not it left him. in the end, who knows? it was i who first
>>introduced him to the church of the subgenius when i bought him a copy
>>of 'Revelation X' -- a discovery waiting to happen. he fell in love
>>with it immediately, and read it in far more detail than i ever did.
I'm very glad about this: the SubGenius is very enlightening to
people who've never questioned their own beliefs.
>What I also wonder is why he never contacted me. He was listed as
>scientologist on my "pro scientology" page, and people have contacted me
>to be removed (some were). If he ever searched for his own name on a
>search engine, he would have found... on the other hand, he never
>updated his WWW page, so maybe he didn't surf very much.
Maybe he didn't want to talk to you, or bring up anything $cientology
related he didn't have to?
>>thanx again to everyone involved in keeping his memory alive. it is a
>
>I'm sure he would have loved your post. Hey, even Marie Gale would have
>liked it :-)
I agree, Keith, the original post was excellent. It's nice to hear from
someone who actually knew Philip.
JimDBB
Somone who was raised in the destructive scientology cult, as Philip Gale
was, doesn't just leave or abandon it. Expecially when his mother is the head
of scientology's scurrilous hate organization, the CCHR. Philip had an awful
lot of programming, complete with the scientology labryinth of lies,
distortions plus all of the 'Wall of Fire', alien implant, Body Thetan
madness. One does not deprogram oneself from this insanity overnight, even in
the open intellectual ambience of MIT.
This kid never had a chance. Scientology had everything to do with this
tragedy.
Five bucks says that the 'grieving' mother is back out on the street with her
CCHR anti-psychiatry posters. How sad that Philip was denied psychiatric
treatment, the one thing that may have helped him.
JimDBB
Tilman Hausherr
In <6g0i7q$5...@enews4.newsguy.com>, "Rebecca Hartong"
<har...@erols.com> wrote:
>I think we usually go astray when we look for "reasons" why a person commits
>suicide. Most of the time, the reason is that the person is mentally ill
>with depression. Depression isn't necessarily caused by anything other than
>(probably) genetically vulnerable brain chemistry.
Are you sure? I think - without evidence - that there are two types of
mental illnesses (all illnesses, not just "being crazy"). 1. "hardware",
2. "software". "hardware" would be a chemical problem in your brain,
"software" a mixup of information (e.g. as a result of scientology, but
also a result of having terrible experiences, e.g. being abused).
About depression - I wonder how they notice that it is a "hardware"
problem, i.e. chemical problem. Probably not by making a hole, but by
noticing that prozac works. If someone is depressed because his loved
one died - would prozac help?
Or does a "software" problem (e.g. feeling very sad) cause a "hardware"
problem (i.e. a chemical imbalance)? I wonder.
(clams will of course get mad reading this. They hate seeing themselves
as a bio-computer. I do not mind seeing myself so.)
Eric Bohlman
Nico Garcia <ra...@shell1.tiac.net> wrote:
: Bored at MIT? Not freaking likely, and only if he chose to be. There are so
Or if he were clinically depressed, which sounds very likely. Depression
can make normally exciting things seem boring.
Eric Bohlman
Tilman Hausherr <til...@berlin.snafu.de> wrote:
: Are you sure? I think - without evidence - that there are two types of
: mental illnesses (all illnesses, not just "being crazy"). 1. "hardware",
: 2. "software". "hardware" would be a chemical problem in your brain,
: "software" a mixup of information (e.g. as a result of scientology, but
: also a result of having terrible experiences, e.g. being abused).
: About depression - I wonder how they notice that it is a "hardware"
: problem, i.e. chemical problem. Probably not by making a hole, but by
: noticing that prozac works. If someone is depressed because his loved
: one died - would prozac help?
: Or does a "software" problem (e.g. feeling very sad) cause a "hardware"
: problem (i.e. a chemical imbalance)? I wonder.
There does seem to be evidence that one's thought patterns can affect
one's brain chemistry. I suspect that genetics enters into the picture
by influencing just how much effect those thought patterns have. It's
possible that in susceptible people, the mechanism that lowers mood may
be strong but the mechanism that raises mood is weak. I seem to recall
that there's evidence for a natural secondary neurotransmitter that
inhibits serotonin reuptake at certain neurons, just like Prozac and
similar drugs do; it sounds to me like it's part of a feedback system for
keeping the biochemical processes that control mood within a certain
range. Presumably there's a similar neurotransmitter that acts to
increase reuptake. If there's a problem producing the first but not the
second, then it's possible that if the person experiences events that
would tend to lower anyone's mood, the feedback mechanism that would
normally "pull him out of it" fails and his mood gets stuck below normal.
Myia2
>he killed himself because his girlfriend left him,' or 'he killed himself
>because he was doing poorly in a class.' Usually, the reason for why a
>person was bored, or jilted or failing in school is the *same* reason why
>they eventually commit suicide: depression.
>
particular thing. I think you have to be predisposed to it by depression.
From my own experience in $cio I ended up being very suicidal for a # of
months, and although I expressed this to staff there, I received no assistance
for it only checks to see if I was going to be a PR risk. At that point if I
had committed suicide it would have been because of $cio. This isn't to say
that I wasn't ever depressed, but had not been suicidal for any length of time
until my final months in $cio.
On speculation if Phil had been brought up in $cio and apparently had a mother
who was very active in dealing with "enemies" of $cio, he must have been
extremely conflicted. My major problem in trying to reintergrate after leaving
$cio was that nothing seemed to mean anything anymore. Remeber I had just
come from being part of "saving the world" from all sorts of things, which is a
pretty hard act to follow. This combined with incrediable quilt and confusion,
was quite a receipe for sucide.
Obviously I never did it, and have finally been getting the support that I
need, but it took over 10 years to reach out to that help.
Anyways I wouldn't rule out $cio as a more direct cause of his death.
>
>
Melissa Reid
> > solid questions, such as "why did he jump on L. Ron Hubbard's birthday",
>
> Believe it or not, March 13th is just another day. It's you and the rest
> of the chorus who decided to attach that particular significance.
Suicides will often, as I understand it, pick a place or day or time or
method for the act that is meaningful to them; trying to make it *mean*
something, or be a statement or symbol of something, I guess. Since he was
raised in Scientology, it seems reasonable to at least consider the
symbolism, though I'm unconvinced there's anything to it in this case.
> > he grew up with as a 4th generation $cientologist) and reality (such as he
> > learned about at MIT and the rest of the real world) have?
>
> I'm pretty sure there are not yet any 4th generation Scientologists of
> that age. Give it another 20 years or so and you'll be correct though.
I seem to recall it was his *mother* who said that about him, before his
death? It was posted here not long ago; anybody else remember?
> As for reality vs CofS or MIT or the view from your bathroom, stridently
> denying that a reality other than the one you accept is somehow less, is
> the basis of what ARS attacks CofS on in the first place.
If you try to parse that sentence, I suspect you'll find that "denying"
was not the word you wanted. Nice Freudian slip though. :-)
Anyway, LOTS of people make their first head-on encounter with The Real
World in college; that's one reason so many colleges have counseling
services and suicide-prevention hotlines.
> > It's still reasonable to ask questions about Mr. Gale's fate, and to
remember
> > that even an incredibly brilliant person, exposed to $cientology all
his life,
> > can die of suicide and have his mother blame the people who exposed her
> > fraudulent cult for his death.
>
> And your point is what? That he committed suicide because of (pick
> one)-> ARS? Scientology? His mother's activities against psychiatry? The
> shock of reality (as per Nico) when he entered the real world (as
> defined by Nico)?
No, I think he committed suicide for the same reason many other bright
young people commit suicide in college. Given Scientology's vehement
opposition to anything that actually *works* in treating depression,
however, his early training and his mother's opinion may be partly
responsible, to the extent that they kept him from getting treatment that
very likely would have saved his life.
Let me repeat this, it's important: Most cases of depression are
TREATABLE. The ways that have been shown to work do not include
Scientology. The ways that have been shown to work best, in most cases
severe enough to threaten the depressed person's life, are AFAIK a
combination of antidepressants and talk therapy.
> The fact is, ARS and the bleating sheep who parrot one another's posts
> endlessly, love a good death. It lends a air of gravity to the
> 'mission', so-to-speak, of ridding earth of that horrible clam-church.
> Young Mr. Gale and the circumstances of his death have apparently little
> or nothing to do with either ARS or Scientology.
I would agree that some of the people here may seem to be more interested
in PR value than the lives involved, and some of those are critics. I
think they've been exposed to Scientology too long; if you're not careful,
your opponent's bad traits can rub off on you during the struggle.
> I'm pretty sure DM and his henchmen read ARS for grins... while lounging
> about drinking 75 year old scotch and smoking Cubans. And why shouldn't
> they like this forum? It keeps the name out there and most people who
> lurk through here don't get the jokes.
I suspect most people who lurk here *do* get the jokes pretty quickly. I
did. And aren't Cuban cigars illegal? :-)
Melissa Reid
Hud Nordin
In article <mreid-03049...@b02087.interl.net> mr...@pobox.com (Melissa Reid) writes:
>In article <352484...@micron.net>, wolf...@micron.net wrote:
>
>> > solid questions, such as "why did he jump on L. Ron Hubbard's birthday",
>>
>> Believe it or not, March 13th is just another day. It's you and the rest
>> of the chorus who decided to attach that particular significance.
>
>Suicides will often, as I understand it, pick a place or day or time or
>method for the act that is meaningful to them; trying to make it *mean*
>something, or be a statement or symbol of something, I guess. Since he was
>raised in Scientology, it seems reasonable to at least consider the
>symbolism, though I'm unconvinced there's anything to it in this case.
It sure seems he's given his family something to really focus their
attention on every coming March 13.
--
Hud Nordin <h...@netcom.com> Silicon Valley / The City of Sunnyvale / California
Xenu Mania
On Thu, 2 Apr 1998, Rebecca Hartong wrote:
> I think we usually go astray when we look for "reasons" why a person commits
> suicide. Most of the time, the reason is that the person is mentally ill
> with depression. Depression isn't necessarily caused by anything other than
> (probably) genetically vulnerable brain chemistry. It's easy to be misled,
> though, into thinking things like 'he killed himself because he was bored,'
> 'he killed himself because his girlfriend left him,' or 'he killed himself
> because he was doing poorly in a class.' Usually, the reason for why a
> person was bored, or jilted or failing in school is the *same* reason why
> they eventually commit suicide: depression.
Another aspect which discourages the taking of sides in regards to
Philip's suicide is the lack of a side to take.
Example: in a stereotype war, there are two sides, each side of which is
wearing a different color coat, let's say red and blue. Ideally, people
who wear blue coats only kill people with red coats and vice versa.
(Don't you wish you could be a 'real' man and come up with something like
that?)
In real life, however, things are no longer that simple. One side
invariably refuses to wear the proper color coat. Others refuse to kill
anybody, no matter what color coat they're wearing. And some people not
only don't want to kill someone else, they kill themselves instead. While
not wearing the proper color coat.
Ignoring the "mental illness" idea for a moment, it reminds me of the
Buddhist monks who kill themselves to protest war. They do not do it to
take a side, they do it to protest war.
That is how I view Philip Gale's death. The point is not that either side
is right. The point is that war is wrong.
Joe Cisar
reply to: iy...@cleveland.freenet.edu
German Scientology News - http://cisar.org
Quite frankly Madam, I just don't give a deer.
Ron Newman
In article <199804030248...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
jim...@aol.com (JimDBB) wrote:
> Somone who was raised in the destructive scientology cult, as Philip Gale
> was, doesn't just leave or abandon it. Expecially when his mother is
the head
> of scientology's scurrilous hate organization, the CCHR. Philip had an
awful
> lot of programming, complete with the scientology labryinth of lies,
> distortions plus all of the 'Wall of Fire', alien implant, Body Thetan
> madness. One does not deprogram oneself from this insanity overnight,
even in
> the open intellectual ambience of MIT.
Indeed one doesn't, but if you read the messages of m brian ladner and others
who knew Philip, it is evident that he had begun to leave Scientology
years before his death, not "overnight".
> This kid never had a chance. Scientology had everything to do with this
> tragedy.
A conclusion unsupported by evidence at this time.
> Five bucks says that the 'grieving' mother is back out on the street with her
> CCHR anti-psychiatry posters.
Let's hope not. I believe that she moved to rural Oregon to get *away* from
her previous life as a CCHR propagandist.
> How sad that Philip was denied psychiatric
> treatment, the one thing that may have helped him.
Again there's no evidence for this, and some against it.
Rebecca Hartong
Tilman Hausherr wrote in message <35737a54....@news.snafu.de>...
>In <6g0i7q$5...@enews4.newsguy.com>, "Rebecca Hartong"
><har...@erols.com> wrote:
>
>>I think we usually go astray when we look for "reasons" why a person
commits
>>suicide. Most of the time, the reason is that the person is mentally ill
>>with depression. Depression isn't necessarily caused by anything other
than
>>(probably) genetically vulnerable brain chemistry.
>
>Are you sure? I think - without evidence - that there are two types of
>mental illnesses (all illnesses, not just "being crazy"). 1. "hardware",
>2. "software". "hardware" would be a chemical problem in your brain,
>"software" a mixup of information (e.g. as a result of scientology, but
>also a result of having terrible experiences, e.g. being abused).
Since you're the second person who's brought this up, I'm beginning to
suspect that I should have stressed the words "USUALLY," "MOST," and "ISN'T
NECESSARILY." As I recently pointed out to someone else in e-mail, I
intentionally chose those words in order to allow room for other
explanations.
I do agree with you, some depression is situational--what you would call a
"software" problem--and, if given enough time, will usually resolve by
itself or with the help of psychotherapy.
>About depression - I wonder how they notice that it is a "hardware"
>problem, i.e. chemical problem. Probably not by making a hole, but by
>noticing that prozac works. If someone is depressed because his loved
>one died - would prozac help?
Situational depression often responds very well to therapy alone. From what
I've seen, in a case like the one you describe, most responsible
psychiatrists would suggest therapy first and then, if that didn't work, try
drugs. I think that sometimes what may *start out* as a "software" problem
can evolve into a "hardware" problem. This would be the kind of person who,
even though years have passed since their loved-one's death, are STILL
depressed. Their friends--and even the depressed person himself--may point
to the death as being the "cause" of the depression, but clearly when years
have passed, it's gone beyond what would be a normal situational kind of
thing. There's a theory in the study of mood disorders called the "kindling
theory" (it's related to a similar theory in epilepsy, interestingly enough)
that says the brain chemistry sort of gets "stuck" in an abnormal pattern
and can't re-set itself after a while. [I apologize in advance to anyone
who actually is familiar with the details of this theory. I'm sure I didn't
give a very good summary of it.]
>Or does a "software" problem (e.g. feeling very sad) cause a "hardware"
>problem (i.e. a chemical imbalance)? I wonder.
See above. Maybe...
>(clams will of course get mad reading this. They hate seeing themselves
>as a bio-computer. I do not mind seeing myself so.)
I don't mind it either. If there is a God, She surely worked a miracle in
making animals as complex as us.
Rebecca Hartong
Eric Bohlman wrote in message ...
Right. I think it was Ex-Mudder who, in another post, described how he
always used to feel bored and restless and thought that was what was making
him depressed.. then he found out that it was actually the other way
around: his depression was what was making him feel bored and restless.
Ron Newman
> > solid questions, such as "why did he jump on L. Ron Hubbard's birthday",
>
> Believe it or not, March 13th is just another day. It's you and the rest
> of the chorus who decided to attach that particular significance.
It has also been pointed out to me subsequently that March 13 was
a "Friday the 13th", a full moon, and a penumbral lunar eclipse.
The significance of any of the above to his suicide is also unknown.
> > he grew up with as a 4th generation $cientologist) and reality (such as he
> > learned about at MIT and the rest of the real world) have?
>
> I'm pretty sure there are not yet any 4th generation Scientologists of
> that age.
This was a claim made by Marie Gale for her children
in the _St. Petersburg Times_ article of November 10, 1991:
Marie C. Gale is raising her children the same way her parents
raised her: using the principles of Scientology.
"Considering my parents and grandmother, my children are fourth-
generation Scientologists," Mrs. Gale, 36, said in a letter.
Keith Henson
Hi Wolf! Been (I would guess) over a year since you last posted
Wolf (wolf...@micron.net) wrote:
: Having watched with interest the initial pack-like mentality of ars in
: attempting to link Phil Gale's suicide to CofS,
Linking Philip to scientology (as an former member whose mom was head of
of the scientology front which attacks mental health) is easy. Linking
his suicide to scientology is a matter of degree. It looks very much like
Philip had clinical depression. How much (if at all) his upbringing in
scientology and family contributed to his unsuccessful attempt to get
psychiatric help is being assessed.
I am, like most of you,
: pleased that friends of his have come forward to stand up for Phil. In
: essence, what they have said is that Phil was not under the thrall of
: Scienology or any other ideology.
I don't think people who spent much time in scientology or were raised
in it ever entirely escape its influence.
Given his apparent interest in the
: Subgenius material it would be just as easy for a pack of anti-Bob
: crusaders to latch onto that as the source of his decision.
: Keith Henson accurately points towards memes as an area of contemplation
: to further understand suicide and Tallulagh asks that ars reduce it's
: rabid frothing and finger-pointing in this case out of respect for a
: young man who met an end only he might have understood.
Did you read my post on the memetic relation between the two "religions"?
: And now, it seems, the post mortum has begun. ARS will mulch through a
: discussion of prozac vs. BT's and the ludicrous attacks by CofS on
: psychiatry and, as always, end up right back where it started: with the
: spreading of the "clam meme" and the stupidity of the "we're right,
: they're wrong" tautology. How long before boring threads discussing
: other suicides dominate the group? Though suicide is a rare event from
: within the ranks of CofS, I see no reason why the more vehement amongst
: you shouldn't trot the Quinton mystery out again.
Already been done (Quinton). But the question of suicide rates is an
interesting one--are suicides more, less, or about the same in scientology
as the general population?
: The only thing I'm curious about - now that it's obvious that the ars
: androids can't hang Phil Gale's death on CofS is - how long before CofS
: is blamed here for not preventing his suicide.
Been done, I did it myself by posting the opinion that it would be hard
for a former member to seek psychiatric help. I seem to have been wrong.
: Keep up the good work friends, remember, Hubbard was bright enough to
: realize that you only stop expanding when no body is talking about you
: any longer.
You also stop expanding when all the newcomers know more about about Xenu
and the Marcabs than the old timers.
In any case, it is good to see you back Wolf. Keith Henson
Tilman Hausherr
In <6g2ksr$h...@enews1.newsguy.com>, "Rebecca Hartong"
<har...@erols.com> wrote:
>I don't mind it either. If there is a God, She surely worked a miracle in
>making animals as complex as us.
Heh heh... I have also no problem seeing myself or other humans as
"animals". There are often situations where it is quite obvious where we
come from... for example, when I see mothers holding their babies, it
reminds me of Koala bears or monkeys... cute.
Or maybe we are just objects in a giant computer experiment and all our
feelings are just bits and bytes.
Tilman Hausherr
In <199804030248...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, jim...@aol.com
(JimDBB) wrote:
>This kid never had a chance. Scientology had everything to do with this
>tragedy.
Jim, you should concentrate on cases where it is obvious that
scientology was involved in it. I certainly dislike scientology, and
consider this case a weak one. The most I ever suggested was that he
didn't seek therapy. And now, even that is to be doubted.
In a few years we might know more about depression. I remember having
read articles that depression might be the result of a virus.
(Borna virus).
Wolf
> > I'm pretty sure there are not yet any 4th generation Scientologists of
> > that age. Give it another 20 years or so and you'll be correct though.
>
> I seem to recall it was his *mother* who said that about him, before his
> death? It was posted here not long ago; anybody else remember?
Another poster did quote the statement. Interesting. I suppose if you
work the 'generations' right you could technically state he was 4th
generation. I think it's misleading though.
> > As for reality vs CofS or MIT or the view from your bathroom, stridently
> > denying that a reality other than the one you accept is somehow less, is
> > the basis of what ARS attacks CofS on in the first place.
>
> If you try to parse that sentence, I suspect you'll find that "denying"
> was not the word you wanted. Nice Freudian slip though. :-)
You're right. My editor was absent when I wrote that!
> > And your point is what? That he committed suicide because of (pick
> > one)-> ARS? Scientology? His mother's activities against psychiatry? The
> > shock of reality (as per Nico) when he entered the real world (as
> > defined by Nico)?
>
> No, I think he committed suicide for the same reason many other bright
> young people commit suicide in college. Given Scientology's vehement
> opposition to anything that actually *works* in treating depression,
> however, his early training and his mother's opinion may be partly
> responsible, to the extent that they kept him from getting treatment that
> very likely would have saved his life.
My reaction to this is that neither Scientology nor clinical methods
have done much in *curing* the depression that leads to suicide. If
stats that are bandied about can be believed suicide amongst teens is at
an all-time high despite the growth of clinical treatment,
anti-depressants and counselors. My personal experience, having spent a
large block of years with CofS is that members rarely kill themselves.
I'll attribute that to CofS's acceptance policies rather than any great
secrets though.
> I would agree that some of the people here may seem to be more interested
> in PR value than the lives involved, and some of those are critics. I
> think they've been exposed to Scientology too long; if you're not careful,
> your opponent's bad traits can rub off on you during the struggle.
That paragraph does parse well Melissa, and if you re-read it I think
you might agree with me that it's a rationalization for the crudeness of
many of the more vocal ars posters. Am I to assume that you believe it
was only their exposure to CofS that made them rude, loud and stupid?
> I suspect most people who lurk here *do* get the jokes pretty quickly. I
> did. And aren't Cuban cigars illegal? :-)
You're probably brighter than the average lurker. And yep, cubans are
illegal, but if you look innocent you can walk through customs with no
problem whatsoever.
Wolf
Rebecca Hartong
Tilman Hausherr wrote in message <359a1aa2....@news.snafu.de>...
>In a few years we might know more about depression. I remember having
>read articles that depression might be the result of a virus.
>(Borna virus).
I recently heard something on TV (the show was called, I think, "Exploring
Your Brain") regarding a possible link between the strep virus and
obsessive-compulsive disorder.
Interesting stuff, eh?
Wolf
Keith Henson wrote:
>
> Hi Wolf! Been (I would guess) over a year since you last posted
Just about right Keith. Been busy.
> Linking Philip to scientology (as an former member whose mom was head of
> of the scientology front which attacks mental health) is easy. Linking
> his suicide to scientology is a matter of degree.
And, I suspect, a waste of time <wink>.
> I don't think people who spent much time in scientology or were raised
> in it ever entirely escape its influence.
Of course, the same can be said of growing up in Texas, or having read
Portnoy's Complaint at the onset of puberty. My point being, it's a red
herring.
> Did you read my post on the memetic relation between the two "religions"?
That one I missed.
How long before boring threads discussing
> : other suicides dominate the group? Though suicide is a rare event from
> : within the ranks of CofS, I see no reason why the more vehement amongst
> : you shouldn't trot the Quinton mystery out again.
>
> Already been done (Quinton). But the question of suicide rates is an
> interesting one--are suicides more, less, or about the same in scientology
> as the general population?
As I posted elsewhere, it's easy to see that suicide is considerably
less in CofS than the general population. But, despite CofS's claims,
I'd attribute that to pre-qualifying rather than the tech itself. It's
easy to sell a $100,000 car if you target the right market.
> : Keep up the good work friends, remember, Hubbard was bright enough to
> : realize that you only stop expanding when no body is talking about you
> : any longer.
>
> You also stop expanding when all the newcomers know more about about Xenu
> and the Marcabs than the old timers.
You know my view well enough to know that I dismiss the whole idea of
thwarting CofS through exposing their unique lore. Given that most
religions have equally astounding beliefs, and that hundreds of millions
of people accept them at face value, it's hard to imagine that this tack
won't eventually backfire or simply fizzle.
> In any case, it is good to see you back Wolf. Keith Henson
heh, heh, thanks Keith. I've been following your exploits. You really
should write a book.
Wolf
Nico Garcia
Anyone this wrong *HAS* to be a clam-droid.
In article <352484...@micron.net>, Wolf <wolf...@micron.net> wrote:
>Nico Garcia wrote:
>> In article <3523F7...@micron.net>, Wolf <wolf...@micron.net> wrote:
>>
>> >The only thing I'm curious about - now that it's obvious that the ars
>> >androids can't hang Phil Gale's death on CofS is - how long before CofS
>> >is blamed here for not preventing his suicide.
>>
>> Wait a sec, clam-droid.
>
>You see Nico, there's that 'clam' meme you've been stricken with. Rather
>than read what I actually said, your programming automatically
>identifies anything that you don't like as being 'clam-powered'
What's a matter? Can't take it? I read what you said. You're a clam
or talking like one.
>> solid questions, such as "why did he jump on L. Ron Hubbard's birthday",
>
>Believe it or not, March 13th is just another day. It's you and the rest
>of the chorus who decided to attach that particular significance.
Oh. So if I impale myself to death with a christmas tree angel while
my family is at Midnight Mass on Christmas, it's "just another day".
>> he grew up with as a 4th generation $cientologist) and reality (such as he
>> learned about at MIT and the rest of the real world) have?
>
>I'm pretty sure there are not yet any 4th generation Scientologists of
>that age. Give it another 20 years or so and you'll be correct though.
Another clam gets it wrong! Remember that *ADULTS* are usually the ones who
join. Marie Gale, Philip's mother, herself described her life in $cientology
involving her parents and grandparents and son.
If you mean "fourth generation born and raised in $cientology", you're
right, there probably aren't any yet.
>As for reality vs CofS or MIT or the view from your bathroom, stridently
>denying that a reality other than the one you accept is somehow less, is
>the basis of what ARS attacks CofS on in the first place.
??? What are you smoking, and where can I get some? The concept that
"what is true for you is true" is only part of the problem. The key
to the problem is that $cientology ***LIES***, deliberately and with
malice, to defraud others and conceal their own behavior.
>> >Keep up the good work friends, remember, Hubbard was bright enough to
>> >realize that you only stop expanding when nobody is talking about you
>> >any longer.
>>
>> And bright enough to invent space aliens stuck to us as the source
>> of all our bad thoughts and illnesses and call it "science", when
>> even his own experiments on "clears" failed miserably.
>
>You'll find little disagreement from me on that count Nico. But they do
>smile a lot and they photograph so nicely.
Hmm. Maybe you're not a clam, since you are publicly disagreeing with the
hidden core of Mr. Hubbard's frauds. Actually, I think they do *not*
photograph well. Not enough expression, after all those "Comm" courses
teaching them to stare like robots.
>> It's still reasonable to ask questions about Mr. Gale's fate, and to remember
>> that even an incredibly brilliant person, exposed to $cientology all his life,
>> can die of suicide and have his mother blame the people who exposed her
>> fraudulent cult for his death.
>
>And your point is what? That he committed suicide because of (pick
>one)-> ARS? Scientology? His mother's activities against psychiatry? The
>shock of reality (as per Nico) when he entered the real world (as
>defined by Nico)?
My point is that these are all possibilities, and open to discussion. And not
to accept by silent acquiescence *blame* for the boy's death that his mother
tried to lay on us, when her own organization's actions more likely
contributed strongly to his fate. Not definitely: I don't know what was in his
mind. But how can we encourage others who may need counseling in similar
situations to seek and accept it with the CCHR slanders and libels littering
corridors and laundromats?
>The fact is, ARS and the bleating sheep who parrot one another's posts
>endlessly, love a good death. It lends a air of gravity to the
>'mission', so-to-speak, of ridding earth of that horrible clam-church.
>Young Mr. Gale and the circumstances of his death have apparently little
>or nothing to do with either ARS or Scientology.
Oh, I see. You're privy to his academic record? His thoughts? Whatever notes
he left behind, his diary, his conversations with his lady or boy friends,
his fraternity brothers, his family, etc.?
The testimony of someone who knew him on this newsgroup is very powerful,
moving, and a source of much better understanding and discredits the
idea. But the *date* of the jump, and his mother's weird post to this
newsgroup, raises some unanswered questions.
>When you people stop ranting about Xenu and BT's and calling people
>clams and carrying on about dead dogs and other meaningless crap, you
>might make some progress. The arrogance of ARS since it's inception,
>that it has unmasked the church (as if CofS had never before been
>attacked or unmasked until the internet came along) is stupid. CofS has
>a long history of withstanding assualt and has rarely had it's walls
>breached. ARS is not even close to shutting the church down. And it
>won't get close as long as the focus is on name calling and hyperbole.
ARS is not about shutting it down. ARS is about exposing the fraud, among
other things, and having the freedom to speak.
>I'm pretty sure DM and his henchmen read ARS for grins... while lounging
>about drinking 75 year old scotch and smoking Cubans. And why shouldn't
>they like this forum? It keeps the name out there and most people who
>lurk through here don't get the jokes.
>
>Wolf
Wolfie, baby, you are definitely a clam or a troll. The lawsuits being filed
against Dennis Erlich and Larry Wollersheim are *not* cheap. Their membership
is, apparently and according to recent exiting members, dropping. The "Xenu"
trade secrets are *blown* and all semblance of confidentiality about body
thetans and funky exorcisms called "auditing" is *gone* and published all over
the Net unlike past publications that have been stolen from bookstores,
sued into silence, or had their authors criminally harassed.
$cientology's fraudulent behavior is DOA, baby. We're just cleaning up
the corpse and making sure it doesn't leak and stink up the Internet.
Nico Garcia
In article <199804030248...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
JimDBB <jim...@aol.com> wrote:
>This kid never had a chance. Scientology had everything to do with this
>tragedy.
>
>Five bucks says that the 'grieving' mother is back out on the street with her
>CCHR anti-psychiatry posters. How sad that Philip was denied psychiatric
>treatment, the one thing that may have helped him.
This is too strong. We don't have the evidence to justify it. Moreover, his
mother may need to resign or take a leave of absence. Philip's father
apparently died in the last few years, and now Philip himself died tragically.
She may take some time off, or change jobs, or even wonder "why couldn't
$cientology help my boy" and look more closely at her own cult, or change
her focus within the cult.
We'll just have to see.
Nico Garcia
In article <6g2l1o$h...@enews1.newsguy.com>,
Excellent, excellent point. Moreover, I've known bi-polar disorder sufferers
who stopped taking their meds because *normal* life seemed boring after the
highs of their manic phases...
Wolf
Nico Garcia wrote:
>
> Anyone this wrong *HAS* to be a clam-droid.
How original.
> >> Wait a sec, clam-droid.
> >
> >You see Nico, there's that 'clam' meme you've been stricken with. Rather
> >than read what I actually said, your programming automatically
> >identifies anything that you don't like as being 'clam-powered'
>
> What's a matter? Can't take it? I read what you said. You're a clam
> or talking like one.
The tendency to use name calling or to ~demonize~ entire groups through
derisive verbal attacks speaks volumes about the people using the tactic
and says nothing about the target of their anger.
> >Believe it or not, March 13th is just another day. It's you and the rest
> >of the chorus who decided to attach that particular significance.
>
> Oh. So if I impale myself to death with a christmas tree angel while
> my family is at Midnight Mass on Christmas, it's "just another day".
It's certainly possible. The math here is pretty straight forward. I
might suggest you wipe up the spittle from your keyboard and apply what
skills you might possess to do the numbers.
> >I'm pretty sure there are not yet any 4th generation Scientologists of
> >that age. Give it another 20 years or so and you'll be correct though.
>
> Another clam gets it wrong! Remember that *ADULTS* are usually the ones who
> join. Marie Gale, Philip's mother, herself described her life in $cientology
> involving her parents and grandparents and son.
>
> If you mean "fourth generation born and raised in $cientology", you're
> right, there probably aren't any yet.
An interesting exchange. First you attack using the clam-meme and then
upon reflection, you consider, accurately, that I might have meant 'born
and raised', which I did. Yet you chose to keep the attack in the post.
Keep at it Nico, you're begininng to show early signs of actual critical
thinking.
> ??? What are you smoking, and where can I get some? The concept that
> "what is true for you is true" is only part of the problem. The key
> to the problem is that $cientology ***LIES***, deliberately and with
> malice, to defraud others and conceal their own behavior.
This goes way off-topic and is actually better suited to philosophy or
religious debates. I think you'd agree (if you 'd just calm down and
think about it) that most religions or idealogies require that members
adapt a reality that serves the purpose of the group itself. That
Hubbard phrased it the way he did is what seems to upset you. But, for
the record, the idea of ~true for you~ is more a part of the selling of
Scientology than it is a LIE, as you put it. The key to the problem with
Scientology is not lying or criminal behaviour as most Scientologists
are no more liars than are Muslims, Mormans or Democrats. The fact is
that actual number of active members may be disputed, but the majority
of Scientologists (or Muslims for that matter) are law-abiding and
wholesome people. At least in their view.
> >> And bright enough to invent space aliens stuck to us as the source
> >> of all our bad thoughts and illnesses and call it "science", when
> >> even his own experiments on "clears" failed miserably.
> >
> >You'll find little disagreement from me on that count Nico. But they do
> >smile a lot and they photograph so nicely.
>
> Hmm. Maybe you're not a clam, since you are publicly disagreeing with the
> hidden core of Mr. Hubbard's frauds. Actually, I think they do *not*
> photograph well. Not enough expression, after all those "Comm" courses
> teaching them to stare like robots.
TR's do cause a certain level of intensity. But then, have you ever had
an insurance salesman get a death-grip on you?
> >And your point is what? That he committed suicide because of (pick
> >one)-> ARS? Scientology? His mother's activities against psychiatry? The
> >shock of reality (as per Nico) when he entered the real world (as
> >defined by Nico)?
>
> My point is that these are all possibilities, and open to discussion. And not
> to accept by silent acquiescence *blame* for the boy's death that his mother
> tried to lay on us, when her own organization's actions more likely
> contributed strongly to his fate. Not definitely: I don't know what was in his
> mind. But how can we encourage others who may need counseling in similar
> situations to seek and accept it with the CCHR slanders and libels littering
> corridors and laundromats?
She was upset. It's obvious (if his friends who posted here are to be
believed) now that P.Gale didn't make his decision based upon either ars
or CofS.
> ARS is not about shutting it down. ARS is about exposing the fraud, among
> other things, and having the freedom to speak.
Whether that's the purpose of all of the more frequent and vocal posters
on ars remains to be seen. ARS for some is more about self-promotion and
occupying the time that an affluent society has rewarded us with. As for
the freedom to speak - we already have that. It's not likely that CofS
will be able to accomplish what other, more powerful groups have already
failed at doing.
> Wolfie, baby, you are definitely a clam or a troll. The lawsuits being filed
> against Dennis Erlich and Larry Wollersheim are *not* cheap. Their membership
> is, apparently and according to recent exiting members, dropping. The "Xenu"
> trade secrets are *blown* and all semblance of confidentiality about body
> thetans and funky exorcisms called "auditing" is *gone* and published all over
> the Net unlike past publications that have been stolen from bookstores,
> sued into silence, or had their authors criminally harassed.
You are the victim of a partial history and personal blindess when it
comes to the effects ARS has actually had on CofS. Cheap is relative in
the instances of both Erlich and Wollersheim. ARS readers of years past
may well recall my thoughts concerning them both. Needless to say, CofS
can easily afford to keep any larger number of lawsuits rolling.
As for confidentiality: the truth is that every OT level easily made
it's way into the field as early as 1968. All one had to do was ask. As
I predicted in 95, CofS realized that it could not keep the more
theatrical aspects of OT3 lore off the net and so began a campaign of
advertising within the group that gently revealed all but the specific
details. The expected shock and loss to CofS from internet publication
never occured except in the egos of the ars clam-meme brood. This, btw,
is what ars'ers so knowledgably refer to DA'ing.
> $cientology's fraudulent behavior is DOA, baby. We're just cleaning up
> the corpse and making sure it doesn't leak and stink up the Internet.
I'm not sure how you earn a living Nico, but if you happen to be a
stockbroker let me know what you're buying so I can sell it short.
One final point. During every major public attack on CofS, be it the
early 60's raids on the DC org for emeters or the 70's raid in Hollywood
or more localized attacks, the claims of the attackers have always been
that membership is falling at an alarming rate. This is merely pr in the
same sense that CofS uses pr when they claim their membership at 8
million. The only thing that really matters here is actual facts and
numbers, which neither you or I or anyone here has. But the CofS does
have those numbers. That's why I think most of this is humorous and
somewhat silly. Pretty much any claim an attacker cares to make
concerning membership will almost certainly be incorrect, so it's an
area of weakness for you folks, not strength.
But then, what's true for you is true for you. Eh Nico?
Wolf
Dave Bird---St Hippo of Augustine
In article <35737a54....@news.snafu.de>, Tilman Hausherr writes
>In <6g0i7q$5...@enews4.newsguy.com>, "Rebecca Hartong" wrote:
>>
>>I think we usually go astray when we look for "reasons" why a person commits
>>suicide. Most of the time, the reason is that the person is mentally ill
>>with depression. Depression isn't necessarily caused by anything other than
>>(probably) genetically vulnerable brain chemistry.
>
>Are you sure? I think - without evidence - that there are two types of
>mental illnesses (all illnesses, not just "being crazy"). 1. "hardware",
>2. "software". "hardware" would be a chemical problem in your brain,
>"software" a mixup of information (e.g. as a result of scientology, but
>also a result of having terrible experiences, e.g. being abused).
>problem, i.e. chemical problem. Probably not by making a hole, but by
>noticing that prozac works.
>problem (i.e. a chemical imbalance)? I wonder.
Yes, how do you think the software is executed? Suppose, to over-
simplify, the brain gets into gridlocked overactivity [depression]
because of a lack of serotonin to raise switching thresholds. If
it is only bad conditions driving someone to be depressed, continual
strass and activity like this overloads the brain's normal capacity
to produce serotonin; and a long period of depression might semi-
permanetly put the serotonin mechanisms out of kilter. OTOH if a
person has a genetic or, more often, developmental [not enough receptors
built originally because their mother was poorly fed] problem, maybe it
will just creep up on them as gradual failure....but more likely as
with various other disease suceptibilities it will first manifest
when the faulty mechanism is under heavy external stress.
>If someone is depressed because his loved
>one died - would prozac help?
Yes: the feeling IS the brain mechanism. It could not make the
external bad corcumstances go away, but it could lessen the
depressive response for a time, while you found other ways to cope.
Eric Bohlman's suggestion maybe even more to the mark, i.e.
there mya be a natural analogue of prozac which kicks in to
reduce re-absorbtion of serotonin in the synaptic cleft and
this is the feedback mechanism that "pulls you out of" natural
depressive response under stress. People with this recovery mechanism
lacking or reduced would have difficulty pulling out but be tipped
by stress into prolonged depression.
|~/ |~/
~~|;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;||';-._.-;'^';||_.-;'^'0-|~~
P | Woof Woof, Glug Glug ||____________|| 0 | P
O | Who Drowned the Judge's Dog? | . . . . . . . '----. 0 | O
O | answers on *---|_______________ @__o0 | O
L |{a href="news:alt.religion.scientology"}{/a}_____________|/_______| L
and{a href="http://www.xemu.demon.co.uk/clam/lynx/q0.html"}{/a}XemuSP4(:)
Paper Tiger
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
In Message-ID: <6g3ieb$8...@news-central.tiac.net>,
ra...@shell1.tiac.net (Nico Garcia) wrote:
>Anyone this wrong *HAS* to be a clam-droid.
>
>In article <352484...@micron.net>, Wolf <wolf...@micron.net> wrote:
[snip]
>>You see Nico, there's that 'clam' meme you've been stricken with. Rather
>>than read what I actually said, your programming automatically
>>identifies anything that you don't like as being 'clam-powered'
>
>What's a matter? Can't take it? I read what you said. You're a clam
>or talking like one.
Hey Wolf! How's it hangin'? I see you haven't lost your ability
to make friends quickly. Dale Carnagie course, or were you born
with it?
Wolf's not a Scientologist. If I remember correctly from our
previous go-rounds, he thinks there's something to the low-level
tech, thinks the COS is a deceitful bunch of thugs, but also thinks
that nothing you can accomplish in a usenet newsgroup is ever going
to effect them overmuch.
What's up, Wolf? Just dropping by, or are things so bad in Hill-10
country that OSA's had to send you in (wink, wink)?
** Paper Tiger (SP3, KBM, LFDoX)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBNSWipYCmc8kif9MJAQH7GgQArNQPLSnIbfchKxgme+9+PLFThTcALwx+
NiED1JLtaUPBCZgPo0Yv2ytq39Emn7yZDShKHILhrc+miYIw5dLqcL4eQiTT/P2F
d5kP+oj2HYv9NhYHsgX2JggA8CkpO+G7n5PsV/aKwh9G02S7CfO4ZKqp688mR7l+
AX4p/34jbaM=
=7N9k
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Melissa Reid
My last response on this, as it is Not Scientology(tm).
In article <352526...@micron.net>, wolf...@micron.net wrote:
> Melissa Reid wrote:
> > No, I think he committed suicide for the same reason many other bright
> > young people commit suicide in college. Given Scientology's vehement
> > opposition to anything that actually *works* in treating depression,
> > however, his early training and his mother's opinion may be partly
> > responsible, to the extent that they kept him from getting treatment that
> > very likely would have saved his life.
>
> My reaction to this is that neither Scientology nor clinical methods
> have done much in *curing* the depression that leads to suicide. If
There seems to be evidence that curing major depression may be along the
same lines as curing diabetes; for some people, at least, it may be a
long-term chemical imbalance, which will need to be treated long-term. I
don't think (but haven't checked the stats) that that is true of most
cases of depression; those could be fairly described as "curable".
> stats that are bandied about can be believed suicide amongst teens is at
> an all-time high despite the growth of clinical treatment,
> anti-depressants and counselors. My personal experience, having spent a
There's another kind of depression called "situational"; the only cure for
that is to change your situation. Teenagers aren't necessarily in the best
position to do that, and aren't fully equipped yet to cope with the adult
problems they're being thrown nowadays. I'm not surprised at the suicide
rate.
(Interesting, even less relevant note: I've seen the observation that
there is one group of Americans who consider loss of face a valid reason
for suicide-- teenagers.)
> large block of years with CofS is that members rarely kill themselves.
> I'll attribute that to CofS's acceptance policies rather than any great
> secrets though.
Or you just got lucky.
> > I would agree that some of the people here may seem to be more interested
> > in PR value than the lives involved, and some of those are critics. I
> > think they've been exposed to Scientology too long; if you're not careful,
> > your opponent's bad traits can rub off on you during the struggle.
>
> That paragraph does parse well Melissa, and if you re-read it I think
> you might agree with me that it's a rationalization for the crudeness of
> many of the more vocal ars posters. Am I to assume that you believe it
> was only their exposure to CofS that made them rude, loud and stupid?
Rationalization, maybe; I try to ascribe the best motives for behavior
that I find plausible. Better for my blood pressure. :-) At least for the
ex-members, I consider it extremely plausible that Co$ *did* make them
rude and loud, at least. Scientology seems to value and encourage (not to
mention train people for) aggressive behavior.
> > I suspect most people who lurk here *do* get the jokes pretty quickly. I
> > did. And aren't Cuban cigars illegal? :-)
>
> You're probably brighter than the average lurker. And yep, cubans are
> illegal, but if you look innocent you can walk through customs with no
> problem whatsoever.
I was amused by the idea of people who bill themselves as "the most
ethical people on the planet" (they do still claim that for themselves,
yes?) using contraband. :-)
Melissa Reid
Steve A
On Fri, 3 Apr 1998 16:49:30 GMT, hkhe...@netcom.com (Keith Henson)
wrote:
> Hi Wolf! Been (I would guess) over a year since you last posted
>
> Wolf (wolf...@micron.net) wrote:
> : The only thing I'm curious about - now that it's obvious that the ars
> : androids can't hang Phil Gale's death on CofS is - how long before CofS
> : is blamed here for not preventing his suicide.
>
> Been done, I did it myself by posting the opinion that it would be hard
> for a former member to seek psychiatric help. I seem to have been wrong.
*Seeking* psychiatric help is only the beginning, Keith. Even though
he may have been able to speak to a psychiatrist or counsellor, I
suspect that the barriers that his Scientology conditioning had put up
would have made any sort of open dialogue a time consuming point to
achieve. Time which he evidently didn't have.
Practicing medicine without a licence? You decide.
"Step Four - Cures for Illness
You will now find BTs and clusters being cures for illnesses of the body
part. Handle all such BTs and clusters by blowing them off. "Cures for
Illness" will then cease to read. [NOTS 34, Fair Use excerpt]
--
Steve A, SP4, GGBC, KBM, Unsalvageable PTS/SP #12
"...Your suppositions include an unwarranted accusation which
I do not consider myself called upon to address..."
- a nice line in diplomatic put-down from Swedish
A/G in response to letter of Warren McShane
Steve A
Er, streptococcus is a bacterium, not a virus.
Rebecca Hartong
Steve A wrote in message <352d1e14....@news.demon.co.uk>...
>On Fri, 3 Apr 1998 13:14:10 -0500, "Rebecca Hartong"
><har...@erols.com> wrote:
>> I recently heard something on TV (the show was called, I think,
"Exploring
>> Your Brain") regarding a possible link between the strep virus and
>> obsessive-compulsive disorder.
>
>Er, streptococcus is a bacterium, not a virus.
LOL! Oops! Well, whatever.... Let me change that, then, to "a possible
link between that strep-thingie and obsessive-compulsive disorder."
Rebecca Hartong
http://www.erols.com/hartong
Wolf
Paper Tiger wrote:
> >In article <352484...@micron.net>, Wolf <wolf...@micron.net> wrote:
> [snip]
> >>You see Nico, there's that 'clam' meme you've been stricken with. Rather
> >>than read what I actually said, your programming automatically
> >>identifies anything that you don't like as being 'clam-powered'
> >
> >What's a matter? Can't take it? I read what you said. You're a clam
> >or talking like one.
>
> Hey Wolf! How's it hangin'? I see you haven't lost your ability
> to make friends quickly. Dale Carnagie course, or were you born
> with it?
Pretty well PT. As for making friends, it must be my winning personality
and charming manners.
> Wolf's not a Scientologist. If I remember correctly from our
> previous go-rounds, he thinks there's something to the low-level
> tech, thinks the COS is a deceitful bunch of thugs, but also thinks
> that nothing you can accomplish in a usenet newsgroup is ever going
> to effect them overmuch.
Close, except for the last part. Try this: ARS will accomplish nothing
as long as it continues to focus on xenu, clams, dead dogs and paranoid
theories about OSA agents hiding in every bush.
> What's up, Wolf? Just dropping by, or are things so bad in Hill-10
> country that OSA's had to send you in (wink, wink)?
Yes. My masters at HQ found out I was making money again and ordered me
to go waste time on ars.
Wolf
Ron Newman
> > >> Wait a sec, clam-droid.
> > >
> > >You see Nico, there's that 'clam' meme you've been stricken with. Rather
> > >than read what I actually said, your programming automatically
> > >identifies anything that you don't like as being 'clam-powered'
> >
> > What's a matter? Can't take it? I read what you said. You're a clam
> > or talking like one.
>
> The tendency to use name calling or to ~demonize~ entire groups through
> derisive verbal attacks speaks volumes about the people using the tactic
> and says nothing about the target of their anger.
Actually, I agree with Wolf Tripp here. Wolf isn't a "clam", nor
is he a Scientologist at all right now. And he deserves to be
treated as an individual. A lot of what he said in this thread
deserves careful consideration.
Ron Newman
In article <35230B...@w3-design.com>, m brian ladner
<lad...@w3-design.com> wrote:
> after receiving email about the phil gale memorial website, for which i
> am deeply grateful to its caretaker, i spent an hour or so reading
> through all the posts concerning phil and his connection to scientology.
> i must admit, i was amazed, and feel phil would be somewhat amused, by
> all the speculation caused by his death, the date upon which he chose to
> end it all, and the ensuing fallout throughout the net community.
>
> i worked closely with phil at earthlink from october 95 until his
> departure back to MIT. in that time, we became what i consider to be
> close friends.
[remainder of this beautifully written, emotionally moving text snipped]
Thank you so much for posting this. I am awestruck; it is
by far the best thing ever written to this forum about Phil.
I printed out a copy and taped it to the light pole outside
Building 54 at MIT, which is now serving as a makeshift memorial
to Phil's life and death. Many people at MIT will appreciate
your words, Brian.
Nico Garcia
In article <mreid-04049...@b02074.interl.net>,
Melissa Reid <mr...@pobox.com> wrote:
>My last response on this, as it is Not Scientology(tm).
>
>In article <352526...@micron.net>, wolf...@micron.net wrote:
>
>> Melissa Reid wrote:
>> > No, I think he committed suicide for the same reason many other bright
>> > young people commit suicide in college. Given Scientology's vehement
>> > opposition to anything that actually *works* in treating depression,
>> > however, his early training and his mother's opinion may be partly
>> > responsible, to the extent that they kept him from getting treatment that
>> > very likely would have saved his life.
>>
>> My reaction to this is that neither Scientology nor clinical methods
>> have done much in *curing* the depression that leads to suicide. If
>
>There seems to be evidence that curing major depression may be along the
>same lines as curing diabetes; for some people, at least, it may be a
>long-term chemical imbalance, which will need to be treated long-term. I
>don't think (but haven't checked the stats) that that is true of most
>cases of depression; those could be fairly described as "curable".
Hi, Melissa! Boy, the people one meets in weird places! There are
also quite a few cases of monopolar depression, a single episode
that can be treated and doesn't seem to happen again.
>> stats that are bandied about can be believed suicide amongst teens is at
>> an all-time high despite the growth of clinical treatment,
>> anti-depressants and counselors. My personal experience, having spent a
>
>There's another kind of depression called "situational"; the only cure for
>that is to change your situation. Teenagers aren't necessarily in the best
>position to do that, and aren't fully equipped yet to cope with the adult
>problems they're being thrown nowadays. I'm not surprised at the suicide
>rate.
Yeah. But it's unclear to me how much of teenage depression is situational,
rather than hormonal, etc.
>(Interesting, even less relevant note: I've seen the observation that
>there is one group of Americans who consider loss of face a valid reason
>for suicide-- teenagers.)
And Americans are weird in their tremendous value for personal life:
other cultures even have rituals for this (hara-kiri, anyone)?
>> large block of years with CofS is that members rarely kill themselves.
>> I'll attribute that to CofS's acceptance policies rather than any great
>> secrets though.
>
>Or you just got lucky.
Or they refuse to accept people under psychiatric treatment, kick people out
thwn they stop "producing" on their weekly stats, and buries the evidence when
a member is killed by themselves or by $cientology staff (the Susan Meister
shooting, Lisa McPherson's death by 17 days of
starvation/dehydration/incarceration at the Clearwater $cientology base,
the guy in France hounded to death by his org trying to make him spend
more money, etc.)
>> > I suspect most people who lurk here *do* get the jokes pretty quickly. I
>> > did. And aren't Cuban cigars illegal? :-)
>>
>> You're probably brighter than the average lurker. And yep, cubans are
>> illegal, but if you look innocent you can walk through customs with no
>> problem whatsoever.
>
>I was amused by the idea of people who bill themselves as "the most
>ethical people on the planet" (they do still claim that for themselves,
>yes?) using contraband. :-)
Remember that $cientology redefines the word "Ethics" as this major
$cientology concept, that seems to ignore the law or professional or normal
social ethics.
Nico Garcia
In article <352577...@micron.net>, Wolf <wolf...@micron.net> wrote:
>Nico Garcia wrote:
>>
>> Anyone this wrong *HAS* to be a clam-droid.
>
>How original.
And well-founded.
>> >> Wait a sec, clam-droid.
>> >
>> >You see Nico, there's that 'clam' meme you've been stricken with. Rather
>> >than read what I actually said, your programming automatically
>> >identifies anything that you don't like as being 'clam-powered'
>>
>> What's a matter? Can't take it? I read what you said. You're a clam
>> or talking like one.
>
>The tendency to use name calling or to ~demonize~ entire groups through
>derisive verbal attacks speaks volumes about the people using the tactic
>and says nothing about the target of their anger.
Unless it's a well-founded one. For example, the phrase "murderer" can
be used to demonize. It can also be completely accurate. Now, clam-droid
is also *insulting*, and meant as such. But I've hardly used against
the entire group of $cientologists, and for the rare member who pops
up and speaks reasonably here, I even refrain from spelling it
$cientology.
You seem to imply that having a "meme" is a bad thing, and means that
the meme is false. Nothing could be more fallacious. Even fundamental
physical facts exist as "memes", or more colloquially as "ideas".
>> >Believe it or not, March 13th is just another day. It's you and the rest
>> >of the chorus who decided to attach that particular significance.
>>
>> Oh. So if I impale myself to death with a christmas tree angel while
>> my family is at Midnight Mass on Christmas, it's "just another day".
>
>It's certainly possible. The math here is pretty straight forward. I
>might suggest you wipe up the spittle from your keyboard and apply what
>skills you might possess to do the numbers.
Possible. Not freaking likely. It's also possible that someone found smashed
by a large object on a street corner had a safe dropped on their head, but
it's vastly more likely that a car hit them. The "just another day" meme you
are spouting seems a blatant attempt to confuse any possible meaning to the
data.
>> >I'm pretty sure there are not yet any 4th generation Scientologists of
>> >that age. Give it another 20 years or so and you'll be correct though.
>>
>> Another clam gets it wrong! Remember that *ADULTS* are usually the ones who
>> join. Marie Gale, Philip's mother, herself described her life in $cientology
>> involving her parents and grandparents and son.
>>
>> If you mean "fourth generation born and raised in $cientology", you're
>> right, there probably aren't any yet.
>
>An interesting exchange. First you attack using the clam-meme and then
>upon reflection, you consider, accurately, that I might have meant 'born
>and raised', which I did. Yet you chose to keep the attack in the post.
>Keep at it Nico, you're begininng to show early signs of actual critical
>thinking.
Meanwhile your usage claim of "that's obviously wrong" fell apart.
>> ??? What are you smoking, and where can I get some? The concept that
>> "what is true for you is true" is only part of the problem. The key
>> to the problem is that $cientology ***LIES***, deliberately and with
>> malice, to defraud others and conceal their own behavior.
>
>This goes way off-topic and is actually better suited to philosophy or
>religious debates. I think you'd agree (if you 'd just calm down and
Oh, please. That $cientology *LIES* and the extent of their fraud
is fundamental to what a.r.s. is about.
>think about it) that most religions or idealogies require that members
>adapt a reality that serves the purpose of the group itself. That
>Hubbard phrased it the way he did is what seems to upset you. But, for
It's the fraud that pisses me off: on the one hand, all truth comes from L.
Ron, and no shared questioning or analysis of the material is permitted.
That's "squirreling", "verbal tech", and other major sins for $cientologists.
>the record, the idea of ~true for you~ is more a part of the selling of
>Scientology than it is a LIE, as you put it. The key to the problem with
>Scientology is not lying or criminal behaviour as most Scientologists
>are no more liars than are Muslims, Mormans or Democrats. The fact is
>that actual number of active members may be disputed, but the majority
>of Scientologists (or Muslims for that matter) are law-abiding and
>wholesome people. At least in their view.
This is again where we have trouble. Define "active member". At the upper
levels of the Orgs, there is strong evidence of massive tax fraud, deceit,
etc. At the outer levels, people who've gone to a course or two, you're
absolutely right. It seems to me that there is a strong relationship between
depth in the org and criminal behavior: the higher up the ranks you go, the
more clearly illegal behavior isi involved.
>> Hmm. Maybe you're not a clam, since you are publicly disagreeing with the
>> hidden core of Mr. Hubbard's frauds. Actually, I think they do *not*
>> photograph well. Not enough expression, after all those "Comm" courses
>> teaching them to stare like robots.
>
>TR's do cause a certain level of intensity. But then, have you ever had
>an insurance salesman get a death-grip on you?
Umm, you mean refusal to leave? Yes. Death-grip? Hardly, I'm stronger
and tougher than most of them. I'm batting .500 on muggers, so far...
>> My point is that these are all possibilities, and open to discussion. And not
>> to accept by silent acquiescence *blame* for the boy's death that his mother
>> tried to lay on us, when her own organization's actions more likely
>> contributed strongly to his fate. Not definitely: I don't know what was in his
>> mind. But how can we encourage others who may need counseling in similar
>> situations to seek and accept it with the CCHR slanders and libels littering
>> corridors and laundromats?
>
>She was upset. It's obvious (if his friends who posted here are to be
>believed) now that P.Gale didn't make his decision based upon either ars
>or CofS.
Obvious? No. Probable? Yes. For example: increasing conflict for Philip
between himself and his family over the cult's beliefs, or an ultimatum
from his mom that if he didn't return to the cult she would have to
disconnect is conceivable, if unlikely.
>> ARS is not about shutting it down. ARS is about exposing the fraud, among
>> other things, and having the freedom to speak.
>
>Whether that's the purpose of all of the more frequent and vocal posters
>on ars remains to be seen. ARS for some is more about self-promotion and
>occupying the time that an affluent society has rewarded us with. As for
>the freedom to speak - we already have that. It's not likely that CofS
>will be able to accomplish what other, more powerful groups have already
>failed at doing.
True. But it's very important to prevent them from setting nasty, dangerous
precedents. And they've been in the forefront of attempts to censor the
Internet, just as they try to expand the use of lawsuits as harassment
to silence authors.
>You are the victim of a partial history and personal blindess when it
>comes to the effects ARS has actually had on CofS. Cheap is relative in
>the instances of both Erlich and Wollersheim. ARS readers of years past
>may well recall my thoughts concerning them both. Needless to say, CofS
>can easily afford to keep any larger number of lawsuits rolling.
Not with their membership shrinking. They are forced to expend reserves:
look at the French Org that was closed for failure to pay taxes, and the
failed attempt by $cientology to pay the tax bill from a Swiss bank account.
>As for confidentiality: the truth is that every OT level easily made
>it's way into the field as early as 1968. All one had to do was ask. As
>I predicted in 95, CofS realized that it could not keep the more
>theatrical aspects of OT3 lore off the net and so began a campaign of
>advertising within the group that gently revealed all but the specific
>details. The expected shock and loss to CofS from internet publication
>never occured except in the egos of the ars clam-meme brood. This, btw,
>is what ars'ers so knowledgably refer to DA'ing.
No, and no. They are *STILL* attemnpting to silence the Internet sites and
critics, such as Grady, with harassing lawsuits, in the face of mounting
expenses and failed strategies. And you should know that "Dead Agent"'ing
refers to attempts such as plastering Ron Newman's and Bob Minton's with
libelous, unsigned flyers about KKK-style hate group behavior when they
are the most peaceful of men, protesting criminal fraud and harassment.
>> $cientology's fraudulent behavior is DOA, baby. We're just cleaning up
>> the corpse and making sure it doesn't leak and stink up the Internet.
>
>I'm not sure how you earn a living Nico, but if you happen to be a
>stockbroker let me know what you're buying so I can sell it short.
You'd be surprised where you might see stuff I do....
>One final point. During every major public attack on CofS, be it the
>early 60's raids on the DC org for emeters or the 70's raid in Hollywood
>or more localized attacks, the claims of the attackers have always been
>that membership is falling at an alarming rate. This is merely pr in the
>same sense that CofS uses pr when they claim their membership at 8
>million. The only thing that really matters here is actual facts and
>numbers, which neither you or I or anyone here has. But the CofS does
>have those numbers. That's why I think most of this is humorous and
>somewhat silly. Pretty much any claim an attacker cares to make
>concerning membership will almost certainly be incorrect, so it's an
>area of weakness for you folks, not strength.
Except that they clearly and blatantly *lie* about those numbers, apparently
even to their own membership. Evidence such as the out-of-date org lists on
their public web pages I consider enlightening. Also, in the past, it's been
relatively easy for them to keep pressure on the newspapers, etc., to bury
stories. How many people remembered Time magazine's articles on $cientology as
the cult of greed and power by the time the lawsuit was settled? But that
lawsuit helped prevent follow-up stories by Time.
From now until the Net changes profoundly, anyone wanting the real scoop can
search for "Xenu AND scientology" and find the details about their nonsense.
Books cannot be stolen from libraries or bookstands, the attempt to swamp the
Internet has so far failed miserably and the full copies of SCAMIZDAT's
publication of lots of secret policies and OT documents still make the rounds.
I call that "winning"....
Tashback
<snip>
> As
> I predicted in 95, CofS realized that it could not keep the more
> theatrical aspects of OT3 lore off the net and so began a campaign of
> advertising within the group that gently revealed all but the specific
> details.
Is that true? That's very interesting if so. Would someone who's seen the
new ads/promotional material describe it? I'm curious to know how they
hint at what's to come, how it differs from previous ad campaigns
promoting the upper levels, and which internal publications carry the
promotion (that is, which members are targeted? What about new members and
potential members who ask about it?).
Tash
Steve A
On Thu, 02 Apr 1998 11:06:42 -0800, Christopher Leithiser
<clei...@bc.cc.ca.us> wrote:
> Rebecca Hartong wrote:
> >
> > Tilman Hausherr wrote in message <354dbfb7...@news.snafu.de>...
> >
> > >Or was he a genius and autist at the same time? Or a genius but
> > >depressed too????
> >
> > That seems likely to me. Depression is apparently an equal-opportunity
> > mental illness. It doesn't care if you're a genius or an imbecile,
> > fabulously wealthy or desperately poor.
> >
>
> I think there's actually a genetic link between genius and depression,
> or at least between depression and facility with words. (wgert and
> Justin must, by extension, be as happy as clams.) The way I picture it,
> intelligence and particularly language is a very recent addition to the
> software--in other words, we're all running beta code here, folks, and
> from the looks of it, a Microsoft product of some sort.
That would assume that the release date had already been passed :-).
Remember, it isn't code being written by some bunch of Jolt-swilling
geeks - it's being written by the same code that's running. Bit like a
sort of self-modifying integrated development environment.
I completely agree with your IQ/depression link, though. Anyone who
has seen large groups of mentally ill (most people with a mental
illness also have depression in one form or another), as I have, may
well have noticed that many of them are of above average intelligence.
I went to a minor grammar school (entrance exam, generally higher
average IQ), and I know of three people roughly in my age group who
committed suicide during the last 15 years, two who are receiving
treatment for drug addiction, and one who is psychotically ill. As far
as I aware, there were no suicides amongst pupils at the (much bigger
= larger sample size) secondary modern (no entrance exam, open entry)
school to which my siblings went. OK, so it's only anecdotal...
> > I think we usually go astray when we look for "reasons" why a person commits
> > suicide. Most of the time, the reason is that the person is mentally ill
> > with depression. Depression isn't necessarily caused by anything other than
> > (probably) genetically vulnerable brain chemistry. It's easy to be misled,
> > though, into thinking things like 'he killed himself because he was bored,'
> > 'he killed himself because his girlfriend left him,' or 'he killed himself
> > because he was doing poorly in a class.' Usually, the reason for why a
> > person was bored, or jilted or failing in school is the *same* reason why
> > they eventually commit suicide: depression.
>
> Something like the popularly-believed link between the full moon and,
> well, lunatic behavior. The behavior came first; the link is found only
> because someone is looking for a facile explanation.
>
> That's the worst part of the $cientologists' war on psychiatry: it
> wastes the best and brightest of our population to allow them to die
> from preventable, chemical imbalance. On the order of saving pennies by
> allowing children to go unvaccinated.
Worse than that, they seem to actually want the treatment of mental
illness to go *backwards*. I could understand their opposition to some
of the '50's and '60's psychiatric practices - there's certainly
plenty to be ashamed of there. But when something like Prozac comes
along, which, while not a universal panacea, despite what the media
says, is a damn sight better than a prefrontal lobotomy, they scream
and rant about that, too.
jdr...@spies.com
jim...@aol.com (JimDBB) wrote:
> This kid never had a chance. Scientology had everything to do with this
> tragedy.
As a person who has had several friends who were "child prodigies" and then
committed or attempted suicide, I would strongly, STRONGLY disagree.
This is not to say that Scientology isn't a rat-fucking scam.
It's to say that your statement that Scientology "had everything to do with
this" is an insult to his intelligence.
I disagree with your statement, JimDBB, and I think you're jumping to
conclusions.
I have no further need to argue with you about this, though. You believe
something, and I don't agree at all. That's it.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
rod_fl...@hotmail.com
Henson. When are you going to stop from being a vulture. You have not
answered my earlier posting. What's your problem? You have not conferred with
Ron Newman yet? The amount of spamming you put on ars is unbelievable. If you
have a problem with spamming then knock it off and start writing things that
are on topic. Rod.
rod_fl...@hotmail.com
Melissa Reid wrote:
snip
>I suspect most people who lurk here *do* get the jokes pretty quickly. I did.
And aren't Cuban cigars illegal?
I get the joke. The joke is that you don't know what you are talking about and
making a fool of yourself. You can only talk and repeat what you have been
told to do, but you have no leg to stand on to prove what you are saying. Keep
telling your "jokes". Your "jokes" have helped a lot of people to join in as
they wanted to know for themselves the truth. Keep helping. It is appreciated.
rod_fl...@hotmail.com
myia2 wrote:
>No...your right you can't put the "blame" for someone committing suicide on
>one particular thing.
snip
Well. Tell the truth then. I know you were suicidal long before you came into
Scientology. Way before that. Now you are lying and blaming your ex-Church. I
know you so don't lie to me and to yourself. Rod.
rod_fl...@hotmail.com
Garcia wrote:
snip
>I agree, Keith, the original post was excellent.
God. you are so prompt in keeping the Phil Gale affair out of MIT that isin
itself suspicious. What's your next move? Blame all the recent and past
suicides on Scientology? Or are you going to blame other religions for the
past suicides? I am sure Phil would be happy to hear that this farce
that you guys put up is over. Rod.
rod_fl...@hotmail.com
Garcia wrote:
snip
> It's still reasonable to ask questions about Mr. Gale's fate, and to
Do me a favor. Keep your anymosity away from Phil's mother. If you are a
friend of Phil as you claim, respect his mother and quit speculating about his
death. He died in MIT premises. Go and see the police reports and clear up
your confusions. Rod.
Ron Newman
> jim...@aol.com (JimDBB) wrote:
> > This kid never had a chance. Scientology had everything to do with this
> > tragedy.
>
> As a person who has had several friends who were "child prodigies" and then
> committed or attempted suicide, I would strongly, STRONGLY disagree.
>
> This is not to say that Scientology isn't a rat-fucking scam.
>
> It's to say that your statement that Scientology "had everything to do with
> this" is an insult to his intelligence.
I agree 100%. A child, and especially a 19-year old ADULT, is
much, much more than his upbringing. Failing to recognize that
deprives people of agency and free will.
JimDBB
>jim...@aol.com (JimDBB) wrote:
>> This kid never had a chance. Scientology had everything to do with this
>> tragedy.
>
>As a person who has had several friends who were "child prodigies" and then
>committed or attempted suicide, I would strongly, STRONGLY disagree.
>
>This is not to say that Scientology isn't a rat-fucking scam.
>
>It's to say that your statement that Scientology "had everything to do with
>this" is an insult to his intelligence.
>
>conclusions.
>
>I have no further need to argue with you about this, though. You believe
>something, and I don't agree at all. That's it.
>
I honor your disagreement but I ask you this...were you ever in the scientology
cult? If you were, I believe that you would understand why I said what I
said. If you were never in this cult then you probably wouldn't understand
this.
You are right...there is no point in arguing this further.
JimDBB
Myia2
>anymosity
Obviously you never made it to MIT, did you make it through High School? it's
animosity.... back grade 1 you go.
Dave Bird---St Hippo of Augustine
In article <6gbijq$btu$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, rod_fl...@hotmail.com
writes
>Henson. When are you going to stop from being a vulture. You have not
>answered my earlier posting.
of any post, just churning out personal bile against Keith Henson.
zabe...@gmail.com
Liz