Gerry Armstrong, despicable liar
ptsc
a page that proves he has snapped his last tether to reality. Why
does he describe me as "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops?"
Simple.
Because I said it was kooky to have a page falsely describing people
in this defamatory manner who weren't. That, alone, is enough to
get you on Gerry Armstrong's kooky hate page. If you disagree with
him, you're a criminal.
Gerry Armstrong, you're a piece of shit and a coward. I state
unequivocally that I am not OSA, nor am I "Scientology's Usenet
Black PR and Ops." You are on notice that your defamatory lie
is just that, a defamatory lie, and you continue to spout such lies
at the peril of the loss of your reputation.
While your lies are clearly libelous, I won't sue. The damage you
do to your own reputation is more than you will ever do to me
with your filthy lies.
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/usenet/goon-squad-follies.html
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/usenet/ars-ptsc-2002-11-18-3.html
From: ptsc <ptsc AT nym DOT cryptofortress DOT com>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Gerry Jihad kooks out
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 13:50:08 -0500
Organization: Busts Your Rips!
Message-ID: <c7ditucfveipo0vjh...@4ax.com>
References: <0a9itucaes6g3f0f5...@4ax.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: ab...@supernews.com
Lines: 47
On Mon, 18 Nov 2002 18:37:41 +0100, Gerry Armstrong <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org>
wrote:
>Brand new babes will strut their stuff. Come one come all.
>http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/usenet/goon-squad-follies.html
Way to go, Gerry Jihad.
You should put a fat lady there, too, singing an aria for the death
of your credibility.
Good job. You've beat out Lerma by having an OSA page that
doesn't include a single active OSA agent except possibly Keith Wyatt.
Here's Gerry's list of OSA:
Deana Holmes
Rebecca Hartong
Diane Richardson
Cerridwen
Fluffygirl (Claire Swazey)
Pookie
Cerridwen
Scarff (close enough)
Keith Wyatt (that one I'll give you)
Gandalf
Starshadow
Tigger
Of these 12, there is credible reason to believe that about 2 of them
are OSA. The rest of them have done nothing but disagree with
Gerry Jihad.
To those of you who may think that Gerry is not, in fact, calling them
OSA, I defy you to explain exactly why the letters "OSA" are twice
the size of the other letters in this graphic:
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/images/marquee.jpg
Assuming a lack of "pure coincidence" for this, what is your interpretation?
IMO, it is chickenshit, stating that the people on the page are OSA
while doing it in such a way that the loon doing it can slither back
from it and claim not to have been saying that after all when he is
later called on it (as I am doing now).
ptsc
roger gonnet
Do you know why? because you have launched such a number of libelous
attacks against lots of people here that you're misplaced to speak
against someone like Gerry.
r
Gerry Armstrong
cryptofortress DOT com> wrote:
>Gerry Armstrong describes me as OSA on his insane hate page,
No, Rob. You've stated that lie over and over, and it's still just a
lie.
>a page that proves he has snapped his last tether to reality. Why
>does he describe me as "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops?"
No, Rob. That's just another lie by you. Your hate posts about me are
black PR. You help Scientology against me. You don't have to do it.
You don't have to pretend to be stupid. If you do have to pretend to
be stupid, that would support a conclusion that you're OSA. But I have
never stated that you're OSA or an OSA employee, and your assertion
that I have is a lie.
>
>Simple.
>
>Because I said it was kooky to have a page falsely describing people
>in this defamatory manner who weren't.
No, Rob. It's because you attack, in and with pretended stupidity,
Scientology's fair game victims. In that you forward OSA's goals. You
do OSA's dirty work.I think you have to pretend to be stupid in order
to do so, but I could be wrong.
> That, alone, is enough to
>get you on Gerry Armstrong's kooky hate page. If you disagree with
>him, you're a criminal.
No, Rob, it's this sort of lie, hatred and black PR which gets you on
the page.
You've repeated your black PR that "disagreeing" with me gets you
called a "criminal" and gets you on the page, which I believe you know
to be a lie and black PR, several times.
[Quote]
The only thing in common between all those people is that they've
disagreed with him.
[End Quote]
Message-ID: <brtftu4hkchkc05mc...@4ax.com>
[Quote]
Of these 12, there is credible reason to believe that about 2 of them
are OSA. The rest of them have done nothing but disagree with
Gerry Jihad.
[End Quote]
Message-ID: <c7ditucfveipo0vjh...@4ax.com>
[Quote]
Here on this one, it's apparent that all you have to do to
get on Gerry's hate page is to disagree with him that it's
a kooky idea to have a hate page in the first place.
[End Quote]
Message-ID: <70ritucikvhp6hbrh...@4ax.com>
[Quote]
Considering that the people have basically disagreed with him, I see
the parallel to OSA is in his own conduct.
[End Quote]
Message-ID: <aohitus6q3ag82i9g...@4ax.com>
You've got all sorts of folks dancing to the same black PR tune:
Tigger:
[Quote]
Trying to "shudder into silence" those who disagree with [me]
[End Quote]
Message-ID:
<17080-3DD...@storefull-2271.public.lawson.webtv.net>
Starshadow:
[Quote]
There are a number of people who call themselves critics who have
pretty much disgusted me over the past several months. This is the
first one who's put me on a DA page simply for disagreeing with him
though.
[End Quote]
Message-ID: <3DDA5CF2...@starshadowlovesxenu.net>
Claire:
[Quote]
Is it true that anyone who disagrees with [Arnie Lerma] or Gerry is
automatically a Dept 20 operative?
[End Quote]
Message-ID: <3dd9...@news2.lightlink.com>
Starshadow:
<quote.
I am a bit hurt and angry by your support of the tactics of these two
against anyone who speaks out disagreeing with them.
<end quote>
Message-ID: <3DECD5D...@starshadowlovesxenu.net>
>
>Gerry Armstrong, you're a piece of shit and a coward.
Because I disagree with you right? Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.
What can I do in response to your hate posts, your viciousness, your
black propaganda, your pretended stupidity? Put your posts up on the
GOoN sQUaD FOLLIES page.
It has never been tried before. There has never been any real attempt
to put some light on your sort of vicious pretended stupidity. I think
many people are just shuddered into silence. There too you forward
OSA's goals for a.r.s. Good people who would support my cause against
Scientology fair game withhold their support because of the kind of
vicious attacks on them that gets the goons put on the GOoN sQUaD
FOLLIES page. There too you forward OSA's goal for my destruction.
If you and the other goons spoke the truth, here's how the above
quoted black PR lines would look:
Rob Clark:
Quote]
The only thing in common between all those people is that they've
forwarded OSA's goals by attacking, in and with pretended stupidity,
Scientology's fair game victims.
[End Quote]
[Quote]
Of these 12, there is credible reason to believe that about 2 of them
are OSA. The rest of them have done nothing but forward OSA's goals
by attacking, in and with pretended stupidity, Scientology's fair game
victims.
[End Quote]
[Quote]
Here on this one, it's apparent that all you have to do to
get on Gerry's hate page is to forward OSA's goals by attacking, in
and with pretended stupidity, Scientology's fair game victims.
[End Quote]
[Quote]
Considering that the people have basically forwarded OSA's goals by
attacking, in and with pretended stupidity, Scientology's fair game
victims., I see no parallel to OSA is in his own conduct.
[End Quote]
Tigger:
[Quote]
Trying to "shudder into silence" those who've forwarded OSA's goals by
attacking, in and with pretended stupidity, Scientology's fair game
victims.
[End Quote]
Starshadow:
[Quote]
This is the first one who's put me on a DA page simply for forwarding
OSA's goals by attacking, in and with pretended stupidity,
Scientology's fair game victims though.
[End Quote]
Claire:
[Quote]
Is it true that anyone who forwards OSA's goals by attacking, in and
with pretended stupidity, Scientology's fair game victims is
automatically a Dept 20 operative?
[End Quote]
Starshadow:
<quote.
I am a bit hurt and angry by your support of the tactics of these two
against anyone who forwards OSA's goals by attacking, in and with
pretended stupidity, Scientology's fair game victims.
<end quote>
Lots of people disagree with me but do not forward OSA's goals by
attacking, in and with pretended stupidity, Scientology's fair game
victims and are not on the GOoN sQUaD FOLLIES page. Your lie that the
people who forward OSA's goals by attacking, in and with pretended
stupidity, Scientology's fair game victims, are on the GOoN sQUaD
FOLLIES page because they "disagree" with me is black PR, which itself
forwards OSA's goals by attacking, in and with pretended stupidity,
Scientology's fair game victims.
> I state
>unequivocally that I am not OSA, nor am I "Scientology's Usenet
>Black PR and Ops."
Who said you were? Oh, the strawman. LFBD
No, Rob, I say that in your pretended stupidity, and your attacks and
black PR of Scientology's fair game victims, you are forwarding
Scientology's black PR and ops.
> You are on notice that your defamatory lie
>is just that, a defamatory lie, and you continue to spout such lies
>at the peril of the loss of your reputation.
No, Rob, it is you who is lying. What you state that I've said I've
never said. You are pretending to be stupid just to be able to lie.
Again, I could be wrong about the pretense. But so far you haven't
proven it. Until you prove me wrong, I will state that you know that
you're lying, and that the stupidity necessary to keep lying is
pretended.
>
>While your lies are clearly libelous, I won't sue.
You have yet to point out even one lie. That is why you won't sue. You
know very well that in a court of law it would be shown beyond a
starshadow of a doubt that you are viciously, falsely black PRing
Scientology's significant fair game victims, and that in doing so you
are forwarding Scientology's fair game goals.
> The damage you
>do to your own reputation is more than you will ever do to me
>with your filthy lies.
Since you have shown not one lie, I believe that your hate posts, such
as this one to which I am responding, on the GOoN sQUaD FOLLIES page
will reflect your reputation, and will not damage mine.
Gerry
© Gerry Armstrong
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org
Verloc
> Gerry Armstrong describes me as OSA on his insane hate page,
> a page that proves he has snapped his last tether to reality. Why
> does he describe me as "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops?"
>
> Simple.
>
> Because I said it was kooky to have a page falsely describing people
> in this defamatory manner who weren't. That, alone, is enough to
> get you on Gerry Armstrong's kooky hate page. If you disagree with
> him, you're a criminal.
That's simply not true. I've said disparaging things about Gerry,
his circle-jerk brethren, and even Bob and Stacy (may they rest
in peace), and even wrote a song parody making fun of his delusions,
but he still won't put me on his hate page! What's even kookier,
he *did* put up one of Tigger's postings,
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/usenet/ars-tigger-2002-11-19.html
which is in fact little more than Tigger quoting the entirety of
one of my postings and agreeing with it. But I get no credit
(except in Tigger's attribution), nor any place on his hate page.
It's all so unfair. Now, he *did* ask me for a photo (you know
how these ex-Scienos are about photos and files and such),
and while I sent him the URL of an image he could use (it would
be *so* cool to be up there in the chorus line with big, dangerous,
imaginary OSA beings like Deana), it doesn't show my ass.
Maybe you've got a certain something that he doesn't
see in me? ;-)
Verloc
> On Wed, 04 Dec 2002 02:42:52 +0000, ptsc <ptsc AT nym DOT
> cryptofortress DOT com> wrote:
>
> >Gerry Armstrong describes me as OSA on his insane hate page,
>
>
> No, Rob. You've stated that lie over and over, and it's still just a
> lie.
>
> >a page that proves he has snapped his last tether to reality. Why
> >does he describe me as "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops?"
>
> No, Rob. That's just another lie by you. Your hate posts about me are
> black PR. You help Scientology against me. You don't have to do it.
> You don't have to pretend to be stupid. If you do have to pretend to
> be stupid, that would support a conclusion that you're OSA. But I have
> never stated that you're OSA or an OSA employee, and your assertion
> that I have is a lie.
Maybe you don't have to pretend to be stupid, so I'll spell it out
for you one more time. You publish, without the consent of the
authors, a set of usenet postings written by a group of people
which includes PTSC. The *title* of the page is "Scientology's
Usenet Black PR and Ops". That implies clearly that the postings
collected are Scientology's postings, does it not? And what
group within Scientology other than the OSA does "Black PR
and Ops"? You have never stated explicitly that PTSC, et. al.,
are OSA in so many words, any more than I have stated explicitly
that you are an intellectually dishonest loon with a delusionally low
opinion of your readers' intelligence, but I don't see what other
implications could be drawn by a sane and knowledgeable person.
Now, *please* can I be on your hate page?
Starshadow
> On Wed, 04 Dec 2002 02:42:52 +0000, ptsc <ptsc AT nym DOT
> cryptofortress DOT com> wrote:
>
>
>>Gerry Armstrong describes me as OSA on his insane hate page,
>
>
>
> No, Rob. You've stated that lie over and over, and it's still just a
> lie.
>
Bullshit. Liar. You keep stating that it isn't a lie, over and over,
and that does NOT make it true, no matter how hard you spin and spin.
Fuck you and your girlfriend. I fully intend to launch a complaint
about your black propaganda page webbing my posts without permission and
indeed with such permission explicity denied. I don't really care what
you think or how you disagree with me on this forum--anyone with a shred
of sanity can see what it is you are doing.
But DO NOT make up quotes that I did not say and have no intention of
saying. DO NOT put words in my mouth.
You're a liar and a thief, Armstrong, and so is your girlfriend.
I intend to do all that is in my power to get you to stop putting my
(copyrighted) words on your web page, and I intend to let the world know
on this forum, at least, when I catch you outright lying about me.
If you had one shred of decency within you, you'd stop. You have
none. Therefore you have my complete contempt.
---
Bright Blessings,
Starshadow, KoX, SP5, Official Wiccan Chaplain ARSCC(wdne)
"Scientology in 1986, after fraud judgement in favor
of ex-member Lawrence Wollersheim --'Not one thin dime for
Wollersheim'
Scientology May 9, 2002 before final appeal--
86,746,430 Thin Dimes for Wollersheim." www.factnet.org
www.xenu.net --what the Church of Scientology doesn't want
you to see
Joe's Garage
> Gerry Armstrong describes me as OSA on his insane hate page,
> a page that proves he has snapped his last tether to reality. Why
> does he describe me as "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops?"
That accurately describes your actions. For anybody who wasn't here when
Scarff arrived, this was his same pattern:
FLIP
outrage at the wrongs committed by Scientology - hate Scientology
FLOP
outrage at the wrongs committed by critics - hate critics
FLIP is the cover story. FLOP is the operation being carried out under
the cover story. Wrongs committed by Scientologists are equated with
wrongs (alleged to be) committed by critics. It is the same A = B
mentality, internally known as the "reactive mind", that Hubbard spread.
Joe Cisar http://cisar.org
The Press and Public Relations Policies of Layfayette Ronald Hubbard
http://www.xenu.net/archive/thesis/cisar-home.html
http://members.tripod.com/cic_ops/counter_warfare/dreamaway_truth.htm
Starshadow
Tigger
wrote:
>"ptsc" <ptsc AT nym DOT cryptofortress
> DOT com> wrote in message
>di...@4ax.com...
>>Gerry Armstrong describes me as OSA
>> on his insane hate page, a page that
>> proves he has snapped his last tether
>> to reality. Why does he describe me as
>> "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and
>> Ops?"
>>Simple.
>>Because I said it was kooky to have a
>> page falsely describing people in this
>> defamatory manner who weren't. That,
>> alone, is enough to get you on Gerry
>> Armstrong's kooky hate page. If you
>> disagree with him, you're a criminal.
>That's simply not true. I've said
> disparaging things about Gerry, his
> circle-jerk brethren, and even Bob and
> Stacy (may they rest in peace),
I hope everybody doesn't count on "Bob and Stacy" resting "in peace".
I have a feeling they are still doing OSA's dirty work for Rinder.
> and even wrote a song parody making
> fun of his delusions, but he still won't
> put me on his hate page! What's even
> kookier, he *did* put up one of Tigger's
> postings,
>http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/c
>ult/usenet/ars-tigger-2002-11-19.html
> which is in fact little more than Tigger
> quoting the entirety of one of my
> postings and agreeing with it.
Oh geeze, I love song parodies.....I must have missed yours.....PLEASE,
show Tigger the way to San Jose. Maybe since GG loves me so much, I can
get it published second handedly.
>But I get no credit (except in Tigger's
> attribution),
Oh yeah......Goofy OrmStrAnge "loves" me, doesn't he? (Blushes TTOT)
So does ArnaldO SlermA.
>nor any place on his hate page. It's all so
> unfair.
Yes, it most certainly is unfair. Maybe GG (Goofy Gerry) will put this
one up and you can have some "fame" too, albeit "second-hand". But
should the "fame" be called "Fair Fame", "Fair Play" or "Fair Game"?
>Now, he *did* ask me for a photo (you
> know how these ex-Scienos are about
> photos and files and such), and while I
> sent him the URL of an image he could
> use (it would be *so* cool to be up there
> in the chorus line with big, dangerous,
> imaginary OSA beings like Deana), it
> doesn't show my ass.
Why GG "loves" me so much, he has shown both my face and my "tail".
(Blushes TTOT)
>Maybe you've got a certain something
> that he doesn't see in me? ;-)
Bigger ears? Longer tail? Fluffier tail? (blushes TOTT) Gee maybe I
can market "IT"?......... How to increase the size of your ears, the
size of your tail and the "fluff" on it. :-)
Tigger
***************************************************************
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
"True peace is not merely the absence of tension but the presence of
justice and brotherhood."
-Martin Luther King, Jr.
**************************************************************
Starshadow
> On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, ptsc wrote:
>
>
>>Gerry Armstrong describes me as OSA on his insane hate page,
>>a page that proves he has snapped his last tether to reality. Why
>>does he describe me as "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops?"
>
>
> That accurately describes your actions. For anybody who wasn't here when
> Scarff arrived, this was his same pattern:
>
> FLIP
> outrage at the wrongs committed by Scientology - hate Scientology
>
> FLOP
> outrage at the wrongs committed by critics - hate critics
>
> FLIP is the cover story. FLOP is the operation being carried out under
> the cover story. Wrongs committed by Scientologists are equated with
> wrongs (alleged to be) committed by critics. It is the same A = B
> mentality, internally known as the "reactive mind", that Hubbard spread.
>
In your Bizarro World, wrongs are only wrongs when committed by the
CofS or by any Scn'ist. In the Real World, wrongs are wrongs, no matter
who commits them. I don't expect you to see that, because you are in the
Lunatic Fringe cult, but I can assure you that this is really so in any
sane worldview.
ExScn
wrote:
>FLIP
>outrage at the wrongs committed by Scientology - hate Scientology
>
>FLOP
>outrage at the wrongs committed by critics - hate critics
>
>FLIP is the cover story. FLOP is the operation being carried out under
>the cover story. Wrongs committed by Scientologists are equated with
>wrongs (alleged to be) committed by critics. It is the same A = B
>mentality, internally known as the "reactive mind", that Hubbard spread.
Okay, you've finally totally convinced me that you're barking mad.
ptsc
wrote:
>On Wed, 04 Dec 2002 02:42:52 +0000, ptsc <ptsc AT nym DOT
>cryptofortress DOT com> wrote:
>>Gerry Armstrong describes me as OSA on his insane hate page,
>No, Rob. You've stated that lie over and over, and it's still just a
>lie.
What do you mean, then by "Usenet's Black PR and Ops."
>>a page that proves he has snapped his last tether to reality. Why
>>does he describe me as "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops?"
>No, Rob. That's just another lie by you. Your hate posts about me are
Look, jackass, that's the title of the fucking page. Look at your own goddamn
page! The TITLE of the page is "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops?"
and all it contains are posts including mine. What do you think people will
think you MEAN BY THE TITLE "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops?"
Goddamn I'm sick of your fucking lying, especially combining it with
lying about me lying, when you're the one lying about you lying,
lying about me lying, and lying about lying in general.
If you don't intend to convey the message, then stop doing it, but
the moment you lie about doing it, you're going to get called on it.
I am not in any way "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops." This
is a lie and a kooky lie at that.
It is kooky to have a hate page calling people "Scientology's Usenet
Black PR and Ops" who aren't. It's a kooky hate page. What's exponentially
more kooky though is to put people on your kooky hate page for doing
nothing more than saying that your kooky hate page is kooky.
What is pathetic is that now people will have to evaluate your other
commentary on things like Scientology on the fact that you will put
up a dishonest, misleading, kooky hate page on people as revenge
for them having said that your kooky hate page is kooky.
It is a defamatory slur and a lie to describe me as "Scientology's Usenet
Black PR and Ops." It simply isn't true and you know it isn't true. The only
reason you have done it is out of revenge and hate, because I have had
the temerity to describe your kooky hate page as kooky. What kooky
thing did you do in response to this? Why, you archived my posts describing
your kooky hate page as kooky on your kooky hate page entitled
"Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops," a lie and a kooky lie at that,
which both you and I and everyone reading this know to be a lie and
a kooky lie. You know that I am not "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and
Ops," but yet you robotically repeat it and robotically archive posts
describing your kooky hate page as kooky on the very kooky hate page
those posts describe.
What is most pathetic about this is that you apparently do not even realize
how kooky and dishonest this is.
Perhaps you're pretending to be stupid and perhaps you really are.
I can't figure it out.
As for the rest of your post, as long as it is based on the lie with which
you open it, there's really no point debating the rest of it. The page is
indeed entitled "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops" and to sane
people, this conveys an intent that you wish to describe the people
archived on that page as "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops,"
the 's at the end of Scientology conveying that those archived on the
page somehow belong to Scientology or are of Scientology, a statement
of fact which is a lie, which I know to be a lie, which you know to be a lie,
which Caroline knows to be a lie and which everyone reading this knows
to be a flat-out, bald-faced lie.
What helps Scientology is not for me to point out that your bald-faced,
kooky lies lies are bald-faced, kooky lies. Nor does it help Scientology
for me to point out that your kooky hate page is a kooky hate page.
What helps Scientology is for you to have a kooky hate page based on
bald-faced, kooky lies.
That helps Scientology a lot, and is entirely your doing.
ptsc
Pts 2
I take it as a personal affront, that FluffyBoy, a.k.a. U-Mike, an
admitted $cieno who has Diane R. and FluffyGirl at the top of his "most
admired on usenet" list, is not on your
OSA Follies chorus Line. :-))
Tom
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
http://www.angelfire.com/scifi/Scientology/
Pts 2
Tom
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
http://www.angelfire.com/scifi/Scientology/
Mark Bunker
cryptofortress DOT com> wrote:
>It is kooky to have a hate page calling people "Scientology's Usenet
>Black PR and Ops" who aren't. It's a kooky hate page. What's exponentially
>more kooky though is to put people on your kooky hate page for doing
>nothing more than saying that your kooky hate page is kooky.
What's also kooky is people ripping each other to shreds on a.r.s.
So you're not OSA. Still you relentlessly attack people and then when
your words are archived, to you, that constitutes a "hate page."
Keep attacking the people who showed the world the truth about
Hubbard's background and keep spitting on ministers because I'm sure
that you're onto something.
We wouldn't want bad eggs like Paulette Cooper or Gerry Armstrong
around here. What do they know about Scientology? What could they
contribute? Hell, they're human, have character flaws and maybe
disagree with you. Good riddance to them.
If you curse enough, Deana stomps her feet enough and Tigger invokes
Bob's name enough maybe you can clean this newsgroup up.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"In fact, I suspect (hell, I KNOW) Mark is being used as a tool by Scientology..."
---- Deana M. Holmes
-----------------------------------------------------------
Cerridwen
No effort was made to verify the identity of the sender.
--------------------------------------------------------
"ExScn" <no...@thnx.net> wrote in message
news:fvgsuuoh842i8me2n...@4ax.com...
LOL!
Hey Exscn, nice to see you back. I missed you. :-)
--
Cerri
"Informing people doesn't involve trying to silence those who
disagree with you." --Prignillius
http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/stats.htm
>
sure
wrote...
>
>On Wed, 04 Dec 2002 15:58:49 -0800, ptsc <ptsc AT nym DOT
>cryptofortress DOT com> wrote:
>
>>It is kooky to have a hate page calling people "Scientology's Usenet
>>Black PR and Ops" who aren't. It's a kooky hate page. What's exponentially
>>more kooky though is to put people on your kooky hate page for doing
>>nothing more than saying that your kooky hate page is kooky.
>
>What's also kooky is people ripping each other to shreds on a.r.s.
>
>So you're not OSA.
So you agree Gerry is full of shit?
Garry
> On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, ptsc wrote:
>
> > Gerry Armstrong describes me as OSA on his insane hate page,
> > a page that proves he has snapped his last tether to reality. Why
> > does he describe me as "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops?"
>
> That accurately describes your actions. For anybody who wasn't here when
> Scarff arrived, this was his same pattern:
>
> FLIP
> outrage at the wrongs committed by Scientology - hate Scientology
>
> FLOP
> outrage at the wrongs committed by critics - hate critics
>
> FLIP is the cover story. FLOP is the operation being carried out under
> the cover story. Wrongs committed by Scientologists are equated with
> wrongs (alleged to be) committed by critics. It is the same A = B
> mentality, internally known as the "reactive mind", that Hubbard spread.
>
> Joe Cisar http://cisar.org
<yawn> Joe Cisar continues *his* pattern of being a liar:
From: ptsc (ptsc_AT_nym_DOT_cryptofortress_DOT_com)
Subject: Filthy Liar Joe Cisar
View: Complete Thread (15 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Date: 2002-04-26 11:32:12 PST
Joe Cisar claims that on March 30, 2001, I posted in support
of OSA's "Nigeria" campaign. Here is every article I posted on
that date concerning Bob Minton. You will note that not a single
one supports the cult's "Nigeria" campaign. Every article is,
in fact, highly critical of the cult's Nigeria campaign.
I do not expect Joe Cisar to correct his filthy fucking lies, because
he is a despicable scumbag who, when he can't discount someone's
arguments, makes up Scientology-style Dead Agent lies about them
instead. Remember this in the future when Joe Cisar makes
dishonest, unsubstantiated attacks on people that he can't back
up.
Gerry Armstrong
cryptofortress DOT com> wrote:
>On Wed, 04 Dec 2002 11:29:05 +0100, Gerry Armstrong <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org>
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 04 Dec 2002 02:42:52 +0000, ptsc <ptsc AT nym DOT
>>cryptofortress DOT com> wrote:
>
>>>Gerry Armstrong describes me as OSA on his insane hate page,
>
>>No, Rob. You've stated that lie over and over, and it's still just a
>>lie.
>
>What do you mean, then by "Usenet's Black PR and Ops."
Well, your posts where you pretend to be really stupid to viciously
attack Scientology's fair game victims are patent black PR. They serve
Scientology's fair game purposes. You have to be pretend really really
hard to be really really stupid not to see it.
When you do that you are doing OSA's work. I don't care if you're
getting paid zip or if you're getting paid $800,000 a year. You don't
say what your consideration is. You are helping Scientology in
attacking its fair game victims just as they want.
I am not saying that others who may not be OSA staff or formally run
operatives are not also doing OSA's work, so don't in your amazing
pretended stupidity claim that. There are times, I am quite sure, when
things I have done have also helped forward OSA's fair game goals. If
I find I have, and at all times, I try to use the best reason and
wisdom I can to thwart and not forward Scientology's fair game goals.
But you are doing it here willfully and flagrantly, and in and with
pretended stupidity, which is a hallmark of OSA's usenet ops.
>
>>>a page that proves he has snapped his last tether to reality. Why
>>>does he describe me as "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops?"
>
>>No, Rob. That's just another lie by you. Your hate posts about me are
>
>Look, jackass, that's the title of the fucking page. Look at your own goddamn
>page! The TITLE of the page is "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops?"
>and all it contains are posts including mine. What do you think people will
>think you MEAN BY THE TITLE "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops?"
Well if they don't pretend really really really hard to be really
really really stupid, or pretend really really hard to be really
really stupid, or even pretend really hard to be really stupid, they
will think that the people on the GOoN sQUaD FOLLIES page are a.r.s.
participants who claim to not be formally employed OSA staff or
formally operated OSA agents but who, in and with pretended stupidity,
forward OSA's purposes by attacking the Scientology cult's fair game
victims.
>
>Goddamn I'm sick of your fucking lying, especially combining it with
>lying about me lying, when you're the one lying about you lying,
>lying about me lying, and lying about lying in general.
There you go, pretending really really really hard to be really really
really stupid. Even the people pretending really really hard to be
really really stupid can't pretend to be stupid enough to not notice
that in all that really really really pretended stupidity you haven't
identified even one lie.
>
>If you don't intend to convey the message, then stop doing it, but
>the moment you lie about doing it, you're going to get called on it.
Well yes, but that isn't what I'm doing, and it isn't what you're
doing. But by pretending really really really hard to be really really
really stupid you can even pretend you've convinced yourself.
>
>I am not in any way "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops." This
>is a lie and a kooky lie at that.
Okay, bowing to your really really really pretended stupidity, but
without accepting your pretended really really really stupid logic and
misinterpretation, I've changed the html page title to state: "posts
by a.r.s. participants who claim to not be formally employed OSA staff
or formally operated OSA agents but who, in and with pretended
stupidity, forward OSA's purposes by attacking the Scientology cult's
fair game victims."
>
>It is kooky to have a hate page calling people "Scientology's Usenet
>Black PR and Ops" who aren't. It's a kooky hate page. What's exponentially
>more kooky though is to put people on your kooky hate page for doing
>nothing more than saying that your kooky hate page is kooky.
There you go with another giant whopper. Identify one person on the
GOoN sQUaD FOLLIES page who is there for doing nothing more than
saying it's kooky. You alone are there because you are an a.r.s.
participant who claims to not be formally employed OSA staff or
formally operated OSA agents but who, in and with pretended stupidity,
forwards OSA's purposes by attacking the Scientology cult's fair game
victims.
Please see my complete post below to refresh yourself on the black PR
attack line. You've been saying, and got your goon squad saying, that
I put them on the GOoN sQUaD FOLLIES page for doing nothing more than
"disagreeing" with me. Now you claim that it's for doing nothing more
than saying the page is kooky. You should only run one program at a
time. As Hubbard said, "It takes a while to beat a program into the
public mind." HCOPL February 3, 1969, "Public Image." You think
"kooky" will fly a bit better than "disagreement?"
>
>What is pathetic is that now people will have to evaluate your other
>commentary on things like Scientology on the fact that you will put
>up a dishonest, misleading, kooky hate page on people as revenge
>for them having said that your kooky hate page is kooky.
Another whopper. It's not a hate page, except in that it evidences a
collection of hate posts by a.r.s. participants who claim to not be
formally employed OSA staff or formally operated OSA agents but who,
in and with pretended stupidity, forward OSA's purposes by attacking
the Scientology cult's fair game victims.
>
>It is a defamatory slur and a lie to describe me as "Scientology's Usenet
>Black PR and Ops."
No it is not. You have to pretend really really really hard to be
really really really stupid to arrive at this conclusion.
> It simply isn't true and you know it isn't true. The only
>reason you have done it is out of revenge and hate, because I have had
>the temerity to describe your kooky hate page as kooky.
No, Rob, the only thing hateful on the page is much of the content of
statements in the posts by the a.r.s. participants gracing the page,
who claim to not be formally employed OSA staff or formally operated
OSA agents, but who, in and with pretended stupidity, forward OSA's
purposes by attacking the Scientology cult's fair game victims.
> What kooky
>thing did you do in response to this? Why, you archived my posts describing
>your kooky hate page as kooky on your kooky hate page entitled
>"Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops," a lie and a kooky lie at that,
>which both you and I and everyone reading this know to be a lie and
>a kooky lie. You know that I am not "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and
>Ops," but yet you robotically repeat it and robotically archive posts
>describing your kooky hate page as kooky on the very kooky hate page
>those posts describe.
No, Rob, you know, as I know that you know, since I know your
pretended stupidity is pretended, that you are doing exactly what I
have been saying -- in and with pretended stupidity you are forwarding
OSA's purposes by attacking the Scientology cult's fair game victims.
A couple of the targets of the goons who are doing this dirty work
decided to show the world what you're doing, and if you can see what
you're doing maybe get you to stop. Now don't pretend to be really
really really really really stupid and claim we're trying to shudder
you into silence. That's the goons' and OSA's hat.The hate is shown in
your hate posts. If you stop pretending to be stupid you could find
the reason and wisdom to stop doing it.
>
>What is most pathetic about this is that you apparently do not even realize
>how kooky and dishonest this is.
No Rob, you have long since, by devoting yourself to pretended
stupidity, lost whatever probity or authority you had to preach to
anyone but your fellows with the same devotion.
>
>Perhaps you're pretending to be stupid and perhaps you really are.
>I can't figure it out.
No, you have to pretend to be really really really really stupid to
not be able to figure it out. But thanks for at least pretending to
start to think like me.
>
>As for the rest of your post, as long as it is based on the lie with which
>you open it, there's really no point debating the rest of it. The page is
>indeed entitled "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops" and to sane
>people, this conveys an intent that you wish to describe the people
>archived on that page as "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops,"
>the 's at the end of Scientology conveying that those archived on the
>page somehow belong to Scientology or are of Scientology, a statement
>of fact which is a lie, which I know to be a lie, which you know to be a lie,
>which Caroline knows to be a lie and which everyone reading this knows
>to be a flat-out, bald-faced lie.
Not to everyone. Only to the folks who pretend to be really really
really stupid.
Here, try to think through this. The html page title at
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/index.html is
"Gerry Armstrong--Scientology's Black Propaganda and Black Ops"
Included on that page are these documents:
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/legal/police/gates-announcement.html
a public announcement by LAPD Chief Daryl Gates;
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/legal/police/jorgenson-ltr-1985-12-03.html
a letter to me from LA DDA Robert N. Jorgenson;
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/writings/dragojevik-ltr-1984-11-09.html
a letter to cult attorney John Peterson from my attorney Julia
Dragojevic;
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/legal/police/boeckman-ltr-1986-03-10.html
a letter to me from LA City Attorney Byron Boeckman.
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/legal/police/ga-ltr-boeckman-1985-12-19.html
a letter from me to Boeckman.
Now, without pretending to be really really really stupid, do you
really really really believe that anyone but a goon or two pretending
to be really really really stupid believes that I'm flat-out
bald-faced lying and am calling or describing Gates, Jorgenson,
Dragojevic, Boeckman and me "Scientology's Black Propaganda and Black
Ops?"
>
>What helps Scientology is not for me to point out that your bald-faced,
>kooky lies lies are bald-faced, kooky lies. Nor does it help Scientology
>for me to point out that your kooky hate page is a kooky hate page.
>What helps Scientology is for you to have a kooky hate page based on
>bald-faced, kooky lies.
Since the only kooky lies on the page are yours and the lies of the
other goon squad troupers, I doubt that you'd get even the really
really really really really really stupid to go for your pretended
logic.
>
>That helps Scientology a lot, and is entirely your doing.
I'm sure you can find at least six goons who will pretend to agree
completely with you.
>
>ptsc
Thank you. And here's the whole post, most of which you snipped, for
everyone's ease of study.
[Quote]
On Wed, 04 Dec 2002 02:42:52 +0000, ptsc <ptsc AT nym DOT
cryptofortress DOT com> wrote:
>Gerry Armstrong describes me as OSA on his insane hate page,
No, Rob. You've stated that lie over and over, and it's still just a
lie.
>a page that proves he has snapped his last tether to reality. Why
>does he describe me as "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops?"
No, Rob. That's just another lie by you. Your hate posts about me are
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Message-ID: <brtftu4hkchkc05mc...@4ax.com>
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Message-ID: <c7ditucfveipo0vjh...@4ax.com>
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Message-ID: <70ritucikvhp6hbrh...@4ax.com>
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Message-ID: <aohitus6q3ag82i9g...@4ax.com>
Tigger:
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Message-ID:
<17080-3DD...@storefull-2271.public.lawson.webtv.net>
Starshadow:
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Message-ID: <3DDA5CF2...@starshadowlovesxenu.net>
Claire:
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Message-ID: <3dd9...@news2.lightlink.com>
Starshadow:
<quote.
<end quote>
Message-ID: <3DECD5D...@starshadowlovesxenu.net>
Rob Clark:
Quote]
[End Quote]
[Quote]
[End Quote]
[Quote]
[End Quote]
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Tigger:
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Starshadow:
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Claire:
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Starshadow:
<quote.
<end quote>
> I state
>unequivocally that I am not OSA, nor am I "Scientology's Usenet
>Black PR and Ops."
Who said you were? Oh, the strawman. LFBD
Gerry
>On Mon, 18 Nov 2002 18:37:41 +0100, Gerry Armstrong <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org>
>wrote:
>
© Gerry Armstrong
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org
[End Quote]
© Gerry Armstrong
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org
ef
Gerry Armstrong <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote:
> No, Rob, you know, as I know that you know, since I know your
> pretended stupidity is pretended, that you are doing exactly what I
> have been saying -- in and with pretended stupidity you are forwarding
> OSA's purposes by attacking the Scientology cult's fair game victims.
> A couple of the targets of the goons who are doing this dirty work
> decided to show the world what you're doing, and if you can see what
> you're doing maybe get you to stop. Now don't pretend to be really
> really really really really stupid and claim we're trying to shudder
> you into silence. That's the goons' and OSA's hat.The hate is shown in
> your hate posts. If you stop pretending to be stupid you could find
> the reason and wisdom to stop doing it.
you, however, are obviously not pretending.
here's a little Wisdom for you: yes, you have been victimized in the
past, but that does not automatically confer you Special Saintly
Status(tm). contrary to the opinions you and yours hold of your
self-hallowed personage, you are human, and thus, much like any other
human, fallible.
and no, disagreeing with you, or bringing to light mistakes you may have
made, does not constitute "forwarding osa's line". to suggest that
dissent should be silenced merely because some of it may happen to
parallel that of your perceived enemies is in effect faulty Reasoning.
to attempt to silence debate is naught but fascistic behavior, best
suited to cults and such. and at its worst, at its most accusatory, it
it infers paranoid delusion.
-ef
Tigger
(snip of bullshit not worth wasting time on.)
You, Goofy Gerry, are the one who is either pretending to be really,
really, really, stupid or indeed you are stupid. The King and Queen of
OSA "helpers" are Robert S. Minton, Jr. and Stacy Brooks.
And they are nowhere on your list.
The "crime" committed by those on your OSA Goon list was to disagree
with you about making a Dead Agent page on Garry Scarff. That makes you
much more the "villain" than Garry, who only posts on a.r.s.
Grow up and act like a human being. And quit whining when people
disagree with you and have the guts to tell you so. The ones doing OSA
work are you and your girlfriend and others of your ilk......Can we
guess why? Is it because you both have received Minton money? Are you
receiving Minton money now? If not, why isn't Robert S. Minton, Jr. and
Stacy Brooks on one of your and Lerma's OSA lists? They are the ones
who are kissing Rinder's ass and jumping to his every command.
Tigger
P.S. Bunker, you can slither back into that OSA snake hole with Minton
and Brooks.
Gerry Armstrong
>In article <95fuuus9k5divblpp...@4ax.com>,
> Gerry Armstrong <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote:
>
>> No, Rob, you know, as I know that you know, since I know your
>> pretended stupidity is pretended, that you are doing exactly what I
>> have been saying -- in and with pretended stupidity you are forwarding
>> OSA's purposes by attacking the Scientology cult's fair game victims.
>> A couple of the targets of the goons who are doing this dirty work
>> decided to show the world what you're doing, and if you can see what
>> you're doing maybe get you to stop. Now don't pretend to be really
>> really really really really stupid and claim we're trying to shudder
>> you into silence. That's the goons' and OSA's hat.The hate is shown in
>> your hate posts. If you stop pretending to be stupid you could find
>> the reason and wisdom to stop doing it.
>
>
>
>you, however, are obviously not pretending.
>
>here's a little Wisdom for you: yes, you have been victimized in the
>past, but that does not automatically confer you Special Saintly
>Status(tm).
Well yes. But who or what said it did? My belief and position is that
there is nothing whatsoever special about me. I believe that we are
all not basically good, or basically bad, but basically holy.
It is true that being persecuted for God's purposes is something to
celebrate, but it's no different for me that it is for you or anyone
else.
>contrary to the opinions you and yours
Who are mine?
> hold of your
>self-hallowed personage,
When have I ever said I was any different from anyone else?
You might think that because I believe I was created by God for His
purposes I therefore believe that I am self-hallowed. But that would
be an erroneous conclusion. I believe I am hallowed by God. But
exactly the same as all his children are. Self-hallowedness would be
impossible. Scientology sells it, but Scientology is a fraud.
>you are human, and thus, much like any other
>human, fallible.
Well yes, but where did you ever get the idea that I thought any
differently? I know that there's lots of black PR on me roaring
around, but it's black PR. I'm just average, common too.
>
>and no, disagreeing with you,
As I stated, "disagreeing" with me is not in any way the reason I
believe that someone might for forwarding OSA's fair game purposes.
This happens to be the current black PR line on me. But it is
demonstrably false.
> or bringing to light mistakes you may have
>made, does not constitute "forwarding osa's line".
Of course not. But black PRing me with claims of mistakes I've made
which were not mistakes can be.
But please list out the mistakes you say I've made which have been
brought to light, and when the person did so I stated that he or she
was "forwarding osa's line."
> to suggest that
>dissent should be silenced merely because some of it may happen to
But it never happened. I never suggested that dissent should be
silenced. I have suggested that behavior be changed. But are you
saying you have never yourself suggested that anyone's behavior be
changed.
So will you please identify any times where I have suggested that
dissent be silenced.
And will you please identify any times where I have suggested that
dissent be silenced merely because some of it may happen to parallel
that of my perceived enemies.
>parallel that of your perceived enemies is in effect faulty Reasoning.
Well yes, if it had happened. Since it never happened, however, your
attack on what you claim is my faulty reasoning is faulty. But perhaps
when you identify the times when you say that I have suggested that
dissent be silenced merely because some of it may happen to parallel
that of my perceived enemies, I would reconsider my conclusion.
>
>to attempt to silence debate is naught but fascistic behavior,
Well yes, but I have never attempted to silence debate. I have done
what I could to encourage debate. It is true that to encourage debate
I have encouraged people who senselessly attack, or pretend to be
stupid, to do something else and actually debate. But I have not done
what you are accusing me of doing.
> best
>suited to cults and such. and at its worst, at its most accusatory, it
>it infers paranoid delusion.
Well yes, but since I have never done that, your conclusion does not
hold.
But take you for example. In this post you have stated or implied that
I have attempted to silence debate, which I most certainly have not.
You have stated or implied that what I have written or done is
fascistic behavior, which it is not, without giving any evidence or
logical argument. You have stated or implied that what I have written
or done is best suited for cults, which it is not, or infers paranoid
delusion, which it does not, without giving any evidence or logical
argument. The clear implication in what you are saying is that I
should change my behavior. That is to say that I should stop my
dissent.
But I would really love to engage you on all the points you raise, so
please respond with the facts I've asked for so that we can have an
excellent debate.
Gerry
>-ef
© Gerry Armstrong
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org
Joe's Garage
I'd be interested in hearing what you think you are debating, or even
disagreeing with. All I see is vilification by name-calling and broad
allegations of delusion and fascism. Give the poor dumbbells of this news
group a lesson, ef, in all your Wisdom.
What did ptsc see or hear April 14th, and from whom, to cause his reflex
condemnation of Bob Minton?
What group of people has ptsc spent most of this year attacking?
Didn't the ptsc-poster come into being by imitating a critic, Grady Ward?
Hasn't ptsc stated that from now on he will hang "warning" signs on those
who don't regard Minton as he does, and make their lives as miserable as
possible?
Why is it so *very* important for ptsc to project *Bob Minton* as the
*Traitor*?
Isn't ptsc making it a point to automatically redirect the same
observations made about him at others?
What is OSA's stock-in-trade?
How are you better qualified to answer these questions than Gerry
Armstrong to the point of saying that he is the one who has Special
Sainlty Status and not you?
Joe Cisar http://cisar.org
The Press and Public Relations Policies of Layfayette Ronald Hubbard
http://www.xenu.net/archive/thesis/cisar-home.html
"To all those on ARS who think the wolf always come to the door wearing
the same disguise, I say go read some history" ... Bob Minton
arnie lerma - www.lermanet.com
<ge...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote:
>On Thu, 05 Dec 2002 09:31:47 -0500, ef <efi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <95fuuus9k5divblpp...@4ax.com>,
>> Gerry Armstrong <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote:
>>
Don't be concerned
Be not concerned, nor surprised
If what you do is criticized
There's always folks who usually can
Find some fault with any plan
Mistakes are made, we can't deny
But they're made only by those who try.
Ferengi + Borg = Scientology
I'd prefer to die speaking my mind than live fearing to speak.
The only thing that always works in scientology are its lawyers
The internet is the liberty tree of the new millennium
Secrets are the mortar binding lies as bricks together into prisons for the mind
http://www.lermanet.com - mentioned 4 January 2000 in
The Washington Post's - 'Reliable Source' column re "Scientologist with no HEAD"
ef
Joe's Garage <swa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I'd be interested in hearing what you think you are debating, or even
> disagreeing with. All I see is vilification by name-calling and broad
> allegations of delusion and fascism. Give the poor dumbbells of this news
> group a lesson, ef, in all your Wisdom.
>
> What did ptsc see or hear April 14th, and from whom, to cause his reflex
> condemnation of Bob Minton?
>
> What group of people has ptsc spent most of this year attacking?
>
> Didn't the ptsc-poster come into being by imitating a critic, Grady Ward?
>
> Hasn't ptsc stated that from now on he will hang "warning" signs on those
> who don't regard Minton as he does, and make their lives as miserable as
> possible?
>
> Why is it so *very* important for ptsc to project *Bob Minton* as the
> *Traitor*?
>
> Isn't ptsc making it a point to automatically redirect the same
> observations made about him at others?
>
> What is OSA's stock-in-trade?
i have absolutely no particular connection to anyone, opinions stated
are mine and no one elses.
much like i presume ptsc's opinions to be.
whether i agree or not --and it is fair to state that i often do not--
is immaterial.
what is important to note, however, is that in my world(tm), people are
free to agree or disagree without necessarily being accused of
implications in various nefarious schemes.
and that is all i have to say on the subject.
regards
-ef
Cerridwen
"ef" <efi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:efish22-06B743...@news1.pubnix.net...
Amen.
--
Cerridwen
"Informing people doesn't involve trying to silence those who
disagree with you." --Prignillius
http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/stats.htm
Tigger
(Joe's Garage)says:
>On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, ef wrote:
(snip)
There are a few questions that you have asked that most anybody with
half a brain can answer.....so that qualifies me...:-)
>What did ptsc see or hear April 14th, and
> from whom, to cause his reflex
> condemnation of Bob Minton?
Don't know when ptsc saw or heard it, but anybody with half a brain
either saw or heard Bob Minton and Stacy Brooks kiss Rinder's ass and
lie like OSA shills in court under oath (even Judge Schaeffer could back
that up) And most people if they are human, have some kind of reaction
when they see someone they thought was an ally, become a traitor and lie
their heads off for the enemy. I guess your reaction was to run and
kiss Minton's ass, wasn't it?
>What group of people has ptsc spent
> most of this year attacking?
The gjroup of people who were so blind and/or besotted with Minton or
his money, that they could not see or admit to themselves what Minton
had done, was doing and will continue to do until Rinder says", "ENOUGH,
your sins against the "church" have been forgiven."
>Why is it so *very* important for ptsc to
> project *Bob Minton* as the *Traitor*?
Because Minton is THE TRAITOR and will continue to be a traitor, just as
you will (apparently) continue to be a Mintonite until you die or Hell
freezes over, whichever comes first.
>What is OSA's stock-in-trade?
OSA has many stocks-in-trade. You probably mean Black PR, Dead Agenting
and lies. Which are also Minton's stocks-in-trade and are also Lerma
and Armstrong stocks-in-trade.
Other OSA stocks-in-trade are: I'll trade you relief from OSA attacks,
intimidation, lawsuits, etc. and/or I will pay you big bucks, for your
soul, obeyance to my every command and silence about our secret deals.
>How are you better qualified to answer
> these questions than Gerry Armstrong
> to the point of saying that he is the one
> who has Special Sainlty Status and not
> you?
Confusing leading question. To answer it, one must assume Armstrong (or
ptsc? or ef?) has "Special Saintly Status".
But an answer is that ptsc did not make aa OSA Black PR, Dead Agent
webpagre, full of asinine allegations about people who disagree with
him. Armstrong and Lerma did and do. ptscc, like everybody, makes
mistakes, but when he does, he usually admits it and apologizes. ptsc
looks at the evidence......he doesn't make things up out of thin air.
Shoot...... ptsc has too hot a temper and too many cuss words to be
eligible for "Special Saintly Status".....:-) But he is honest and
thorough and right 98 per cent of the time.
HTH......
Tigger
ptsc <ptsc nym <dot> alias <dot> net>
wrote:
Fuck you, Armstrong. *plonk*
ptsc
Deana Holmes
news:clqquuojpra4n040c...@4ax.com:
> Gerry Armstrong describes me as OSA on his insane hate page,
> a page that proves he has snapped his last tether to reality. Why
> does he describe me as "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops?"
>
> Simple.
>
> Because I said it was kooky to have a page falsely describing people
> in this defamatory manner who weren't. That, alone, is enough to
> get you on Gerry Armstrong's kooky hate page. If you disagree with
> him, you're a criminal.
>
> Gerry Armstrong, you're a piece of shit and a coward. I state
> unequivocally that I am not OSA, nor am I "Scientology's Usenet
> Black PR and Ops." You are on notice that your defamatory lie
> is just that, a defamatory lie, and you continue to spout such lies
> at the peril of the loss of your reputation.
What? Gerry still has a reputation to defend? I thought he'd totally
trashed it by now, except among people like Rev. Grabdough.
Deana
mir...@sonic.net
Beverly Rice
> On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, ptsc wrote:
> > Gerry Armstrong describes me as OSA on his insane hate page,
> > a page that proves he has snapped his last tether to reality. Why
> > does he describe me as "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops?"
> That accurately describes your actions. For anybody who wasn't here when
> Scarff arrived, this was his same pattern:
> FLIP
> outrage at the wrongs committed by Scientology - hate Scientology
> FLOP
> outrage at the wrongs committed by critics - hate critics
There is also this:
FLIP:
Person claims to be an ex-scientologist ~out~ of scientology . . .
FLOP:
Person then continues using scientological actions.
ARC = As-Ising the Real Conundrum,
Beverly
Warrior
wrote:
>
>What? Gerry still has a reputation to defend? I thought he'd totally
>trashed it by now, except among people like Rev. Grabdough.
>
>Deana
>mir...@sonic.net
I certainly wouldn't ask you to testify about Scientology if I needed
a credible witness.
By the way, who told you Gerry is delusional?
Do you enjoy dumping on people, Deana?
Warrior - Sunshine disinfects
http://warrior.xenu.ca
roger gonnet
"Starshadow" <stars...@starshadowlovesxenu.net> a écrit dans le
message de news: 3DEE12FA...@starshadowlovesxenu.net...
> roger gonnet wrote:
> > Well, I'm not agreeing.
> >
> > Do you know why? because you have launched such a number of libelous
> > attacks against lots of people here that you're misplaced to speak
> > against someone like Gerry.
> >
> >
> Since when has ptsc ever put up a libel page on other critics?
Since he started to attack everyone not agreeing about his Minton's
attacks.
R
roger gonnet
> Joe's Garage wrote:
> > On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, ptsc wrote:
> >
> >
> >
>
> In your Bizarro World, wrongs are only wrongs when committed by the
> CofS or by any Scn'ist. In the Real World, wrongs are wrongs, no
matter
> who commits them. I don't expect you to see that, because you are in
the
> Lunatic Fringe cult, but I can assure you that this is really so in
any
> sane worldview.
Well, Starshadow, it seems that in your own bizarre world, wrongs exist
mostly when one does not agree with you.
I don't expect that you could realize that Bob could have some valid
reasons to act like he did, and that ptsc and some others don't have the
right to attack like they did. Joe Cisar has perfectly summarized the
situation above (and long before).
PTSC's and Tigger's etc rants about Bob have not the least utility and
are counterproductive here. That's the wrong they do to those who want
to get that scn scam forbidden
roger
Gerry Armstrong
Rob, you snipped this:
[Quote]
On Wed, 04 Dec 2002 15:58:49 -0800, ptsc <ptsc AT nym DOT
cryptofortress DOT com> wrote:
>On Wed, 04 Dec 2002 11:29:05 +0100, Gerry Armstrong <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org>
>wrote:
>
>
>ptsc
[Quote]
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Message-ID: <brtftu4hkchkc05mc...@4ax.com>
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Message-ID: <c7ditucfveipo0vjh...@4ax.com>
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Message-ID: <70ritucikvhp6hbrh...@4ax.com>
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Message-ID: <aohitus6q3ag82i9g...@4ax.com>
Tigger:
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Message-ID:
<17080-3DD...@storefull-2271.public.lawson.webtv.net>
Starshadow:
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Message-ID: <3DDA5CF2...@starshadowlovesxenu.net>
Claire:
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Message-ID: <3dd9...@news2.lightlink.com>
Starshadow:
<quote.
<end quote>
Message-ID: <3DECD5D...@starshadowlovesxenu.net>
Rob Clark:
Quote]
[End Quote]
[Quote]
[End Quote]
[Quote]
[End Quote]
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Tigger:
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Starshadow:
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Claire:
[Quote]
[End Quote]
Starshadow:
<quote.
<end quote>
Gerry
>On Mon, 18 Nov 2002 18:37:41 +0100, Gerry Armstrong <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org>
>wrote:
>
© Gerry Armstrong
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org
[End Quote]
The reason why you snipped this post and killfiled me rather than
respond and rationally debate the points I've made is obvious to all
but the few who can muster the requisite tonnage of pretended
stupidity to pretend to not see.
© Gerry Armstrong
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org
Joe's Garage
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, ef wrote:
Thanks for answering. It is now perfectly understandable that you are
concerned about being accused of implications.
The source of my confusion was that you made several nefarious accusations
yourself against Gerry Armstrong on this thread called "Gerry Armstrong,
despiable liar" during an OSA operation against Gerry. I wanted to make
certain that the purpose of your hit-and-run attack was "freedom of
speech." Please rest assured that you are perfectly free to attack anyone
(figurately speaking), and to assist whoever you would like to attack
anyone, as long as you don't cause more harm or damage than you are
complaining about. I believe your post proves this. If I'm not mistaken,
however, you are wrong on one very small but nevertheless very important
detail. Your freedom to speak is not a freedom to gracefully back out of
any mess you may have plunged yourself into.
There are some people who believe that posting on a.r.s. to blame Gerry
Armstrong for allegedly damaging your freedom of speech is similar to
posting on a Jewish news group that you blame Holocaust survivors for
WWII. You are perfectly free to do so, but if you think freedom of speech
means you can escape the fact that you have associated yourself with a
bunch of destuctive loons, it could be time for a little reality check.
Have a nice day, and thanks for helping to protect our wonderful freedoms
which are under attack.
Joe Cisar http://cisar.org
The Press and Public Relations Policies of Layfayette Ronald Hubbard
http://www.xenu.net/archive/thesis/cisar-home.html
http://members.tripod.com/cic_ops/counter_warfare/dreamaway_truth.htm
Diane Richardson
<gon...@antisectes.net> wrote:
>
>"Starshadow" <stars...@starshadowlovesxenu.net> a écrit dans le
>message de news: 3DEE276...@starshadowlovesxenu.net...
>> Joe's Garage wrote:
>> > On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, ptsc wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> In your Bizarro World, wrongs are only wrongs when committed by the
>> CofS or by any Scn'ist. In the Real World, wrongs are wrongs, no
>matter
>> who commits them. I don't expect you to see that, because you are in
>the
>> Lunatic Fringe cult, but I can assure you that this is really so in
>any
>> sane worldview.
>
>Well, Starshadow, it seems that in your own bizarre world, wrongs exist
>mostly when one does not agree with you.
>
>I don't expect that you could realize that Bob could have some valid
>reasons to act like he did,
Of course Minton had valid reasons to act as he did. He wanted to
protect his financial assets, and to do so he betrayed the trust of
many people who had trusted him.
There are plenty of people willing to harm others in order to protect
their wealth. Minton is among them.
>and that ptsc and some others don't have the
>right to attack like they did.
Of course he has the right to express his opinions on a public forum.
You might not have that right in France, but U.S. citizens are still
protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution, whether you
like the idea or not.
>Joe Cisar has perfectly summarized the
>situation above (and long before).
>
>PTSC's and Tigger's etc rants about Bob have not the least utility and
>are counterproductive here.
That's your personal opinion, and you have every right to express it.
>That's the wrong they do to those who want
>to get that scn scam forbidden
Are you claiming that if no one criticizes the Gerroline Unit the
Church of Scientology will be "forbidden"? If that is what you
mean, you're as delusional as the Gerroline Unit.
Diane Richardson
ref...@bway.net
Starshadow
> "Starshadow" <stars...@starshadowlovesxenu.net> a écrit dans le
> message de news: 3DEE276...@starshadowlovesxenu.net...
>
>>Joe's Garage wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, ptsc wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> In your Bizarro World, wrongs are only wrongs when committed by the
>>CofS or by any Scn'ist. In the Real World, wrongs are wrongs, no
>
> matter
>
>>who commits them. I don't expect you to see that, because you are in
>
> the
>
>>Lunatic Fringe cult, but I can assure you that this is really so in
>
> any
>
>>sane worldview.
>
>
> Well, Starshadow, it seems that in your own bizarre world, wrongs exist
> mostly when one does not agree with you.
Bullshit. I don't make up hate pages, Roger. I don't go to the CofS
and turn over former friends and colleagues' names. I don't brown nose
those who do.
I tell it like I see it, ON FUCKING USENET. THAT is what Usenet is
for. If you don't like it, get the fuck off Usenet and try some gentler
medium. Putting up hate pages is bizarre, no matter how you and your
fucking lunatic apologists try to spin it.
Going over to the enemy and betraying a family you once claimed to
want to help is also bizarre, no matter how you and the other fucking
lunatic apologists try to spin it.
>
> I don't expect that you could realize that Bob could have some valid
> reasons to act like he did, and that ptsc and some others don't have the
> right to attack like they did. Joe Cisar has perfectly summarized the
> situation above (and long before).
Stating the truth is not an attack, Roger, no matter how you and the
other lunatic apologists try to spin it.
And Joe Cisar is barking mad, and you seem to be brown nosing your way
to total lunacy too. Fine. The fucking lunatics HAVE won. Enjoy your
stupid fucking lunatic cult, Roger. The CofS may not be proud to have
such a rival--but they can't help but be amused that they've won in this
arena. They've quit sending ops to ars, Roger. Ever wonder why? Or do
you once again put the blame on everyone else but where it squarely
lands, on you and the other lunatic fringe who now think betrayal is
perfectly okay, discussing betrayal is "turncoat", and putting up hate
pages claiming people are running OSA ops who are simply disagreeing ON
USENET is perfectly okay.
Fuck you and your cult. Fuck all cults.
---
Bright Blessings,
Starshadow KoX, Sp4, and now on a "cult critic's" hate page
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/usenet/goon-squad-follies.html
for the High Crime of Disagreeing with self-made cult victim Gerry
Armstrong and Caroline Letkeman.
For the real truth about cults go to www.xenu.net
ExScn
Anonymous...@See.Comment.Header.gmsociety.org (Cerridwen) wrote:
>NOTE: This message was sent thru a mail2news gateway.
>No effort was made to verify the identity of the sender.
>--------------------------------------------------------
>
>"ExScn" <no...@thnx.net> wrote in message
>news:fvgsuuoh842i8me2n...@4ax.com...
>
>> On Wed, 4 Dec 2002 09:01:00 -0500, Joe's Garage
><swa...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >FLIP
>> >outrage at the wrongs committed by Scientology - hate Scientology
>> >
>> >FLOP
>> >outrage at the wrongs committed by critics - hate critics
>> >
>> >FLIP is the cover story. FLOP is the operation being carried out
>under
>> >the cover story. Wrongs committed by Scientologists are equated
>with
>> >wrongs (alleged to be) committed by critics. It is the same A = B
>> >mentality, internally known as the "reactive mind", that Hubbard
>spread.
>
>>
>> Okay, you've finally totally convinced me that you're barking mad.
>
>LOL!
>
>Hey Exscn, nice to see you back. I missed you. :-)
That was very nice of you, Cerri :)
Hey, congrats on winning (?) the ars MVP award ! That'd have to be a
world first - a Scn poster (even if a somewhat critical one..hehe)
getting kudos from the ars mob, eh ?
For one brief moment I thought this might herald a new era in the
history of ars, but then I caught up with the posts .. same old, same
old :)
So who do you think is currently winning the looniest Ex award -
Arnie, Zorro, Roger, Joe Cisar, .. or Gerry & friend ? My book has
the latter pair clearly in front with Roger & Arnie determined as ever
to show they'll always be up there.
That should be good enough for another OSA paycheck, you think ?
I never did get any Minton bucks :(
ExScn
cryptofortress DOT com> wrote:
>On Wed, 04 Dec 2002 11:29:05 +0100, Gerry Armstrong <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org>
>wrote:
>
>
>What is pathetic is that now people will have to evaluate your other
>commentary on things like Scientology on the fact that you will put
>up a dishonest, misleading, kooky hate page on people as revenge
>for them having said that your kooky hate page is kooky.
Exactly ! Critics are happy when the CoS commits another foot bullet
but it's quite amazing how so many do precisely the same sort of
thing.
>
>What is most pathetic about this is that you apparently do not even realize
>how kooky and dishonest this is.
>
>Perhaps you're pretending to be stupid and perhaps you really are.
>I can't figure it out.
>
I think any criticism is dismissed, as a probable result of the
residual Hubbardian indoctrination, simply as a 'make-wrong',
'invalidation', 'suppression','non granting of beingness', yabba,
yabba.
And this refusal by Gerry (and others) to accept any sort of criticism
is not only symptomatic of a still existing cultish mindset, it's just
downright bloody infantile.
>What helps Scientology is not for me to point out that your bald-faced,
>kooky lies lies are bald-faced, kooky lies. Nor does it help Scientology
>for me to point out that your kooky hate page is a kooky hate page.
>What helps Scientology is for you to have a kooky hate page based on
>bald-faced, kooky lies.
>
>That helps Scientology a lot, and is entirely your doing.
Yep. A 'major' critic dedicating a large-part of his web-site to
making a complete fool of himself saves them the trouble of doing it.
Garry
> >
> >What? Gerry still has a reputation to defend? I thought he'd totally
> >trashed it by now, except among people like Rev. Grabdough.
> >
> >Deana
> >mir...@sonic.net
>
> I certainly wouldn't ask you to testify about Scientology if I needed
> a credible witness.
>
> By the way, who told you Gerry is delusional?
>
> Do you enjoy dumping on people, Deana?
You mean the same way your hero, Lying Gerry Jihad dumps on people,
Mark??
Oh, I'm sorry, Mark, you can't see what I'm talking about. You have
your tongue to far entrenched up Gerry's foul-smelling ass to know
what I'm talking about.
>
> Warrior - Sucking up disinfects
> http://warrior.xenu.ca
Starshadow
Don't feel like the Lone Ranger. Though I'm glad, actually, as much as I
could have used some money, I'd have hated to feel I'd actually accepted
money from someone who turned traitor to all I've believed in.
I'm glad you're back. Dunno how long I'll be around.
Cerridwen
No effort was made to verify the identity of the sender.
--------------------------------------------------------
ExScn" <no...@thnx.net> wrote in message
news:hul1vuo97u1q10ht8...@4ax.com...
> On 5 Dec 2002 03:09:05 -0000,
Let me correct something I wrote in this last post. None of these
critics have ever actually attacked me directly here on ars. To say
that would not be accurate or truthful. I guess what I was thinking at
the time was that many of these guys have defended Gerry and his OSA
goon hate page and I took that as indirect attack.
Truth be told, I have probably shot more arrows at them then they have
ever shot at me.
My error
Cerridwen
Double Agent and OSA GOON.
"Informing people doesn't involve trying to silence those who
disagree with you." --Prignillius
Nomen Nescio
> On 5 Dec 2002 03:09:05 -0000,
> Anonymous...@See.Comment.Header.gmsociety.org (Cerridwen) wrote:
>
> >LOL!
> >
> >Hey Exscn, nice to see you back. I missed you. :-)
>
> That was very nice of you, Cerri :)
:-)
>
> Hey, congrats on winning (?) the ars MVP award ! That'd have to be a
> world first - a Scn poster (even if a somewhat critical one..hehe)
> getting kudos from the ars mob, eh ?
Ya, I went right into the Sally Fields valence. "They like me, they
really like me!"
>
> For one brief moment I thought this might herald a new era in the
> history of ars, but then I caught up with the posts .. same old, same
> old :)
Yes, It does seem to be at an all time low. :-(
>
> So who do you think is currently winning the looniest Ex award -
> Arnie, Zorro, Roger, Joe Cisar, .. or Gerry & friend ? My book has
> the latter pair clearly in front with Roger & Arnie determined as ever
> to show they'll always be up there.
Yes I would agree with you about the Gerroline Unit. Afterall, they
did give me a place on their hate page. I'm really surprised Gerroline
hasn't figured out a hidden secret meaning in the name Cerridwen to
align somehow with Crowley and therefore firmly establish the fact that
I am a secret double agent. ;-)
Let's see. Cerridwen is a Celtic Goddess and is well known for her
Cauldron of Inspiration and Wisdom. Then of course Crowley, lived in
England, and was known to have taken a shit in a big black pot while
writing his words of "inspiration and wisdom".
Ya that proves it!
Anyway, I have to tell you that I really like Roger. He is a very
sweet and kind man and he has never attacked me like the other ones
that you mentioned. I think part of the problem is the language
thingie.
>
> That should be good enough for another OSA paycheck, you think ?
> I never did get any Minton bucks :(
Well being a super secret double agent I get paid by all sides,
including the followers of Crowley. ;-)
So you are just going have to try harder, my dear
Cerri
ExScn
Anonymous...@See.Comment.Header.gmsociety.org (Cerridwen) wrote:
>NOTE: This message was sent thru a mail2news gateway.
>No effort was made to verify the identity of the sender.
>--------------------------------------------------------
>
>ExScn" <no...@thnx.net> wrote in message
>news:hul1vuo97u1q10ht8...@4ax.com...
>> On 5 Dec 2002 03:09:05 -0000,
>
>Let me correct something I wrote in this last post. None of these
>critics have ever actually attacked me directly here on ars. To say
>that would not be accurate or truthful. I guess what I was thinking at
>the time was that many of these guys have defended Gerry and his OSA
>goon hate page and I took that as indirect attack.
Yes, and they are *exactly* the same guys who continue to defend
Minton. Weird that. And that's why I included Roger, whose posts I
confess I stopped reading years ago - it just took too much effort to
parse his sentences. You on the other hand, who has the patience to
sit and peer through a magnifying lamp to read those mags and provide
all those 'stats' are obviously a different sort of fish kettle
altogether:)
>Truth be told, I have probably shot more arrows at them then they have
>ever shot at me.
Ahh, but aren't you're the cunning little double agent ?
Deana Holmes
news:6petuug0oqa8vkl2h...@4ax.com:
> Keep attacking the people who showed the world the truth about
> Hubbard's background and keep spitting on ministers because I'm sure
> that you're onto something.
Yes, this is coming straight from the guy who (used to) have his nose
firmly shoved up Bob Minton's ass.
Just thought I'd remind you of what a despicable person you are, Mark
Bunker.
Deana M. Holmes
mir...@sonic.net
Deana Holmes
news:v7n0vu89b69l16hd1...@4ax.com:
> Rob, you snipped this:
Why the hell should anyone answer you, Gerry? You take everything that
they say out of context, then you combine it with the crazy salad that
happens to be your brain, and what comes out is some discombobulated pack
of lies.
Until you get out of your paranoid pseudo-Scientology view of the world,
you're going to be of absolutely no use to anyone, not even yourself. But I
don't hold out too much hope, given that you've got Rev. Grabdough
supporting you in your insane rantings.
Deana M. Holmes
mir...@sonic.net
(c) Deana M. Holmes, all rights reserved. To Gerry Armstrong, his
girlfriend, Rev. Gandow and anyone who might be acting with them, you have
got to have my permission to reproduce my post *anywhere*. Failure to get
that permission will cause me to go to Rev. Grabdough's superiors in
Germany. Trust me, you don't want that to happen.
Deana Holmes
> By the way, who told you Gerry is delusional?
I can read his damned posts and find out he's a deluded ass. This is not
rocket science, Warrior, even though your friendship with Gerry blocks you
from seeing that he's a first-class grade-A jerk.
>
> Do you enjoy dumping on people, Deana?
Hell no. I also don't appreciate people lying about me, like your good
friend Jackass Gerry Armstrong.
Deana M. Holmes
mir...@sonic.net
(c) Deana M. Holmes, all rights reserved. Don't copy this for your web page
or anywhere else, Gerry, because I will be right on Rev. Grabdough's ass if
you do. Don't infringe *my* copyright.
Mark Bunker
wrote:
Deana, by responding to your post, I have now reproduced your public
post in total. How is this different from putting your post on a
website?
How has Gerry Armstrong taken your comments out of context if he posts
the entire text of your posts?
Don't you wish you could call Caroline "Gerry's mistress?" Wouldn't
that prove more satisfying to you?
Have you met Rev. Gandow or spoken with him or do you simply choose to
attack him because he disagrees with you?
When I was in Clearwater, we had a man tell us that he wrote a letter
to the newspaper saying Hubbard was a bad science fiction writer.
That caused Al Buttner to go to his boss and try to get the man in
trouble or fired. Glad to see you approve of those tactics.
And glad to see you have moved from stomping your feet when people
disagree with you to actually going to mommy to say Rev. Gandow made a
funny face at you.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"In fact, I suspect (hell, I KNOW) Mark is being used as a tool by Scientology..."
---- Deana M. Holmes
-----------------------------------------------------------
Deana Holmes
> Deana, by responding to your post, I have now reproduced your public
> post in total. How is this different from putting your post on a
> website?
Pffth. You proved yet again that you're an asshole. Now go away.
Deana M. Holmes
mir...@sonic.net
Gerry Armstrong
wrote:
>Gerry Armstrong <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote in
But I can't resist.
© Gerry Armstrong
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org
Mark Bunker
wrote:
>Mark Bunker <mbunk...@charter.net> wrote in
This is a copyrighted rerun of a oft used insult from Deana M. Holmes.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"You have got to have my permission to reproduce my post *anywhere*.
Failure to get that permission will cause me to go to Rev. Grabdough's
superiors in Germany. Trust me, you don't want that to happen."
---- Deana M. Holmes stomps her feet and threatens a minister
-----------------------------------------------------------
Mark Bunker
wrote:
>Mark Bunker <mbunk...@charter.net> wrote in
Stomping of the feet is a copyrighted feature from Deana M. Holmes.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"You have got to have my permission to reproduce my post *anywhere*.
Failure to get that permission will cause me to go to Rev. Grabdough's
superiors in Germany. Trust me, you don't want that to happen."
---- Deana M. Holmes stomps her feet and threatens a minister
-----------------------------------------------------------
Caroline Letkeman
Cunning because you answered the post you wrote when you were being
exscn?
Message-ID: <hul1vuo97u1q10ht8...@4ax.com>
How about when you post as nomen nescio?
Message-ID: <5b221eb9f9c54fa9...@dizum.com>
What a stroker you are! Ha ha ha.
Hey Cerridwen-- your signal to noise ratio graph is way crossed.
-----------------------------
Caroline Letkeman
------------------------------
Starshadow
> On Sat, 07 Dec 2002 05:46:18 GMT, Deana Holmes <mir...@sonic.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Mark Bunker <mbunk...@charter.net> wrote in
>>news:jdr2vu0bpe969ehku...@4ax.com:
>>
>>
>>>Deana, by responding to your post, I have now reproduced your public
>>>post in total. How is this different from putting your post on a
>>>website?
>>
>>Pffth. You proved yet again that you're an asshole. Now go away.
>>
>>Deana M. Holmes
>>mir...@sonic.net
>
>
> Stomping of the feet is a copyrighted feature from Deana M. Holmes.
Being an unmitigated asswipe is a trademarked feature of the Bunksquad,
and his wanna-bes of the Lunatic Fringe.
Once upon a time you could count on this sort of behavior from OSA
goons and CofS cultists. Now you can count on it from t he Lunatic
Fringe, even though they still call themselves "cult critics" or
"anti-cultists", in the mistaken belief that repeating a lie often
enough will make it true.
Deana Holmes
> But I can't resist.
Sure you can. But you think you're God. That's your problem, Gerry, is that
you have delusions of deity. And guess what? You're not God. You're not
even a prophet of God. You're a sinner like the rest of us, and right now,
you're being a particularly annoying one. There, go ahead and post this on
your OSA website.
Deana M. Holmes
mir...@sonic.net
ExScn
<caro...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote:
>Cunning because you answered the post you wrote when you were being
>exscn?
>Message-ID: <hul1vuo97u1q10ht8...@4ax.com>
>
>
>How about when you post as nomen nescio?
>Message-ID: <5b221eb9f9c54fa9...@dizum.com>
>
>What a stroker you are! Ha ha ha.
>
>Hey Cerridwen-- your signal to noise ratio graph is way crossed.
You're just not very bright are you ?
You really shouldn't try to analyse header information about who's
posting what when you don't understand the basics.
Clue: (not necessary to those not brain damaged) - Cerridwen posted
used a remailer.
Too hard ?
Caroline Letkeman
I didn't analyze the header information. You are so busted.
<lol!>
Starshadow
> On Sat, 07 Dec 2002 15:55:59 GMT, ExScn <no...@thnx.net> wrote:
>
>
>>On Sat, 07 Dec 2002 15:01:47 +0100, Caroline Letkeman
>><caro...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Cunning because you answered the post you wrote when you were being
>>>exscn?
>>>Message-ID: <hul1vuo97u1q10ht8...@4ax.com>
>>>
>>>
>>>How about when you post as nomen nescio?
>>>Message-ID: <5b221eb9f9c54fa9...@dizum.com>
>>>
>>>What a stroker you are! Ha ha ha.
>>>
>>>Hey Cerridwen-- your signal to noise ratio graph is way crossed.
>>
>>You're just not very bright are you ?
>>
>>You really shouldn't try to analyse header information about who's
>>posting what when you don't understand the basics.
>>
>>Clue: (not necessary to those not brain damaged) - Cerridwen posted
>>used a remailer.
>>
>>Too hard ?
>
>
>
> I didn't analyze the header information. You are so busted.
> <lol!>
>
No, Gerroline, you are so insane.
Diane Richardson
<caro...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote:
>On Sat, 07 Dec 2002 15:55:59 GMT, ExScn <no...@thnx.net> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 07 Dec 2002 15:01:47 +0100, Caroline Letkeman
>><caro...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote:
>>
>>>Cunning because you answered the post you wrote when you were being
>>>exscn?
>>>Message-ID: <hul1vuo97u1q10ht8...@4ax.com>
>>>
>>>
>>>How about when you post as nomen nescio?
>>>Message-ID: <5b221eb9f9c54fa9...@dizum.com>
>>>
>>>What a stroker you are! Ha ha ha.
>>>
>>>Hey Cerridwen-- your signal to noise ratio graph is way crossed.
>>
>>You're just not very bright are you ?
>>
>>You really shouldn't try to analyse header information about who's
>>posting what when you don't understand the basics.
>>
>>Clue: (not necessary to those not brain damaged) - Cerridwen posted
>>used a remailer.
>>
>>Too hard ?
>
>
>I didn't analyze the header information.
THAT, my dear Gerroline Unit, is self-evident! LOL!!!!
Diane Richardson
ref...@bway.net
Cerridwen
"Caroline Letkeman" <caro...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote in message
news:bjv3vuct96q8a6g76...@4ax.com...
> Cunning because you answered the post you wrote when you were being
> exscn?
> Message-ID: <hul1vuo97u1q10ht8...@4ax.com>
>
>
> How about when you post as nomen nescio?
> Message-ID: <5b221eb9f9c54fa9...@dizum.com>
>
> What a stroker you are! Ha ha ha.
>
> Hey Cerridwen-- your signal to noise ratio graph is way crossed.
>
<sigh> Only you would be able to read something evil into this. Just
like your kooky stuff about Crowley and subliminal messages.
Here's the simplicity of it.
I responded to Ex scn's post.
I sent it through a remailer. Using a remailer sometimes means that
you don't know if it will actually show up or not and you definitely
don't know WHEN it would show up. Occasionally, but not
often, the remailers will strip my nym "Cerridwen" and my post arrives
as nomen nescio or anonymous. That is why I SIGN my posts. So if my
nym does get stripped, you still know it was from me.
After I sent it I realized I stated something that wasn't true, but my
first post had not yet appeared on ars due to the fact that I use a
remailer, and I wanted to get the correction posted as soon as
possible.
So I used the very same message ID from Exscn's post that I originally
responded to.
As you can see, my correction arrived before my original post. And my
original post had my nym stripped off it and Nomen Nescio was there
instead. This is part of the problem with using a remailer.
That is the very simple reason for your confusion. If you had asked me
nicely, I would have told you. You didn't need to go into to full
kookarama mode and assign nefarious reasons for it.
I don't expect to you understand or believe it as you are too wrapped
up in your nutty conspiracy theories. Conspiracy theories are a basic
part of the Scn mindset. You need to work on this.
--
Cerridwen
Double Agent/Cunning OSA Goon
ExScn
<caro...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote:
>I didn't analyze the header information. You are so busted.
><lol!>
<sigh>
ExScn
(Cerridwen) wrote:
That explanation was FAR too complex, Cerri !
Do you have any idea how long it's going to take her to word clear and
clay-demo all that ??
Like, how's she going to handle 'kookarama' for a start ! Ask Gerry ?
Whoo, hoo..talk about pressing buttons.
ptsc <ptsc nym <dot> alias <dot> net>
>On Sat, 07 Dec 2002 15:01:47 +0100, Caroline Letkeman
><caro...@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote:
>>Cunning because you answered the post you wrote when you were being
>>exscn?
>>Message-ID: <hul1vuo97u1q10ht8...@4ax.com>
>>How about when you post as nomen nescio?
>>Message-ID: <5b221eb9f9c54fa9...@dizum.com>
>>What a stroker you are! Ha ha ha.
>>Hey Cerridwen-- your signal to noise ratio graph is way crossed.
>You're just not very bright are you ?
>You really shouldn't try to analyse header information about who's
>posting what when you don't understand the basics.
Caroline did this years ago to "prove" that Sten-Arne was one of the
sporgers. When it was conclusively proven that her information was
worthless, she fell back on her time-honored tactic of feigning (or is
it feigning?) insanity.
>Clue: (not necessary to those not brain damaged) - Cerridwen posted
>used a remailer.
>Too hard ?
Too hard.
ptsc
kEvin
<mbunk...@charter.net> wrote:
>>(c) Deana M. Holmes, all rights reserved. To Gerry Armstrong, his
>>girlfriend, Rev. Gandow and anyone who might be acting with them, you have
>>got to have my permission to reproduce my post *anywhere*. Failure to get
>>that permission will cause me to go to Rev. Grabdough's superiors in
>>Germany. Trust me, you don't want that to happen.
>Deana, by responding to your post, I have now reproduced your public
>post in total. How is this different from putting your post on a
>website?
This comes down to something called an implied license. When someone
makes a post to a forum like USENET where they can expect reproduction
in whole or part as part of the course of operation of that forum, a
reasonable person can assume that they've granted permision to
reproduce the work in whole or in part. Moving the post to a medium
outside of the original forum isn't a normal part of the operation of
the forum and isn't automatically assumed as part of the implied
license. This has actually been tested by a couple of the better FAQ
authors who were annoyed to see their work (and some of those FAQs
took serious effort to write) reproduced outside of USENET.
Or rather, it's been tested that they can enforce a copyright for
reproduction outside of USENET. I don't know of any case where
anyone's attempted to enforce copyright on followups remaining
entirely within USENET.
===
kEvin
m...@manual-override.com
Mark Bunker
wrote:
Thank you, Kevin. Very interesting.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"You have got to have my permission to reproduce my post *anywhere*.
Failure to get that permission will cause me to go to Rev. Grabdough's
superiors in Germany. Trust me, you don't want that to happen."
---- Deana M. Holmes stomps her feet and threatens a minister
-----------------------------------------------------------
BarbaraSchwarz
How dare you, people, to compare L. Ron Hubbard with Hitler. From who
did you learn to make such a comparison? From the Germans who claimed
that George W. Bush would be a Hitler, because he wants to go after
mass murderer Saddamm Hussein?
Can't you read, folks, I wrote over and over that the Scientology orgs
are criminally infiltrated on orders of a German secret service. In
other words: If somebody denied your rights in the orgs (and you are
not just making it up to blame that criminal infiltration on L. Ron
Hubbard and true Scientologists)you have to sue the infiltrators and
very much so the German government, it's secret services, that
originated and controls that infiltration. They altered Ron's writings
and policies, to make SCN less workable or even look ridiculous, or
even criminal, they forged Ron's sigature on documents, they stole and
altered Ron's private documents. So how come that you blame American
L. Ron Hubbard and not the Nazis?
Some of you want to be experts on the Nazis. In this thread I read
that some of you knew that Germans were masters of infiltration. How
come you folks are unable to make the comparison that Scientology also
was/is secretly infiltrated by their international agents? How come
you don't suspect the American government being infiltrated? If you
would have lived amongst Germans as I did for so many years, if you
would speak their language as I do, you would know that they did not
give up wanting to rule the world or infiltrating only because they
lost WW II.
The Nazis destroyed Ron's life. On their orders Ron was killed. Gerry
Armstrong knows that the documents that he has taked from the orgs are
all forgeries. They were put there by Scientology intiltrators, for
Gerry to take. They wanted him to take it and they filed law suits
against him, claiming they wanted the documents back to make the
impression to the world that the documents are really those of Ron.
Those documents are nothing worth at all. It's all a big fraud and set
up. Gerry wasted his life with those forgeries, selling them as true
material of L. Ron Hubbard. Speak about Gerry's wasted life!
There are CIA officers that know that I am speaking the truth and I am
working on it that they come forward. Those officers watched every
step that Ron did under electronical surveillance. L. Ron Hubbard is
the biological son of former President Dwight David Eisenhower, and I
am indeed Ron's daughter and President Eisenhower's daughter. Ron was
as little a Nazi as President Eisenhower was who defeated the Nazis as
Supreme Allied Commander in 1945.
There is a rumor set up by a high governmental official that he has
evidence that I am President Eisenhowers daughter, but pay no
attention to that. He is wrong. Ron was his son, I am Ron's child,
which makes me to President Eisenhower's granddaughter, but I am also
entitled through protection by the CIA. However, as the CIA is also
secretly infiltrated by the Germans and their itnernational agents,
they did not do their best to protect us. That is why Marty Rathbun
(de Rothschild) had to hire on top of it private investigators and
body guards to protect my life.
Barbara Schwarz, December 9, 2002