Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Simply Scientologist

6 views
Skip to first unread message

Pierre

unread,
Dec 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/29/96
to

I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
nuclear power plant.

Talking about Scientology or Scientologists is fun. But the best you
could do is doing Scientology and that means being more ethic and
efficient in life. That also mean being free from any drug or stress.
That also mean being able to really help people, and I know what is
help, after saving life of member of my familly who were sverely ill.

And you, have you ever really helped ?

Tilman Hausherr

unread,
Dec 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/29/96
to

>I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
>nuclear power plant.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Now you've really scared me!

What is your professional opinion on the accuracy of "All about Radiation"?

Tilman


Ex Mudder

unread,
Dec 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/29/96
to

Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:

>I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
>nuclear power plant.
>

>Talking about Scientology or Scientologists is fun. But the best you
>could do is doing Scientology and that means being more ethic and
>efficient in life. That also mean being free from any drug or stress.
>That also mean being able to really help people, and I know what is
>help, after saving life of member of my familly who were sverely ill.
>
>And you, have you ever really helped ?

Well, you are French, so no cracks about the effectiveness of the
Comm Course.
Trivia Question: What was the name of the frenchman who killed
himself after being hassled by your sect, and which French head of
Scientology was convicted for manslaughter in relation to this?

p/m


Ex Mudder / http://www.best.com/~dkeith
If email to me bounces, its probably because Xenu was in it.
"If two people have all the same opinions,
only one of them is doing the thinking"

Pierre

unread,
Dec 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/29/96
to

Tilman Hausherr wrote:

>
> In <32C661...@club-internet.fr>, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>
> >I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
> >nuclear power plant.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Now you've really scared me!
>
> What is your professional opinion on the accuracy of "All about Radiation"?
>
> Tilman

I've studied a lot about radiation and neutronic (sorry I'm not sure of
the translation). All about radiation is completely true and is wise to
give the point of view of the mental effect of radiation.

Don't mix-up civil nuclear and nuclear weapon.

All about radiation is a very good book and not a controversial one.

Ex Mudder

unread,
Dec 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/29/96
to

Tell me again... which power plant do you work for? And what is
your position?
You sound like a janitor.

Pierre

unread,
Dec 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/29/96
to

Ex Mudder wrote:
>
> Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>
> >I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
> >nuclear power plant.
> >
> >Talking about Scientology or Scientologists is fun. But the best you
> >could do is doing Scientology and that means being more ethic and
> >efficient in life. That also mean being free from any drug or stress.
> >That also mean being able to really help people, and I know what is
> >help, after saving life of member of my familly who were sverely ill.
> >
> >And you, have you ever really helped ?
>
> Well, you are French, so no cracks about the effectiveness of the
> Comm Course.

Well, it's a real pleasure to meet somebody like you : I mean so warm
and friendly... (I write in the same mood than you, you see, we call it
tone 1,1)

Instead of criticizing Scientology, have you ever tried to audit (using
the Dianetics technology) someone ? Have you seen result of good
application of Scientology ?
What is true is what is true for you. Do you criticize a movie only
after reading the papers or after watching it ? Do the same with
Scientology.

Happy new year to every one sincere

Ex Mudder

unread,
Dec 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/29/96
to

Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>Ex Mudder wrote:
>> Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>>
>> >I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
>> >nuclear power plant.
<snip>

>> >And you, have you ever really helped ?
>>
I've helped a lot of people. Didn't charge them either.

>> Well, you are French, so no cracks about the effectiveness of the
>> Comm Course.
>
>Well, it's a real pleasure to meet somebody like you : I mean so warm
>and friendly... (I write in the same mood than you, you see, we call it
>tone 1,1)

And here I though I was being nice... after all, LRH tech is
supposed to be able to teach you to talk to anyone, any time, and
language.


>
>Instead of criticizing Scientology, have you ever tried to audit (using
>the Dianetics technology) someone ? Have you seen result of good
>application of Scientology ?

I have seen no good results from Scientology

>What is true is what is true for you. Do you criticize a movie only
>after reading the papers or after watching it ? Do the same with
>Scientology.

If people I turst say the movie will suck, I'm not going to waste
good money on it.
And yes, I will criticise a movie after watching it. Want to hear
what I think of "Orientation"?


>
>Happy new year to every one sincere

Flunk! Non-confront. I will repeat the question:


Trivia Question: What was the name of the frenchman who killed
himself after being hassled by your sect, and which French head of
Scientology was convicted for manslaughter in relation to this?


Ex Mudder's home page: http://www.best.com/~dkeith
In your mail to me bounces, try removing Xenu
Godwin's Law: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the
probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler
approaches one."
My addendum: Unless you are discussing Scientology, you will
have just lost the argument.

saswato

unread,
Dec 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/29/96
to

Pierre wrote:
>
>
> Well, it's a real pleasure to meet somebody like you : I mean so warm
> and friendly... (I write in the same mood than you, you see, we call it
> tone 1,1)

Ah, superman is arranging people in tonescale levels.

> Instead of criticizing Scientology, have you ever tried to audit (using
> the Dianetics technology) someone ?


Explain to me please, why should I try to make someone belief he
has engrams and bt's and so on and then audit them out.

>Have you seen result of good
> application of Scientology ?

I've never seen good application of scientology (if it were
possible) so no results either.

> What is true is what is true for you. Do you criticize a movie only
> after reading the papers or after watching it ? Do the same with
> Scientology.

"what is true is what is true for you"-bullshit, if you like
to belief it then do so, but don't expect everybody else to
take 'your truth' for real.

gr. wato

Pierre

unread,
Dec 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/29/96
to

Sorry but Ex Mudder wrote:
>
> >> Well, you are French, so no cracks about the effectiveness of the
> >> Comm Course.
>
> And here I though I was being nice... after all, LRH tech is
> supposed to be able to teach you to talk to anyone, any time, and
> language.
Sorry, it wasn't nice at all. I think we don't have the same point of
view of being nice.


> >What is true is what is true for you. Do you criticize a movie only
> >after reading the papers or after watching it ? Do the same with
> >Scientology.
>

> If people I turst say the movie will suck, I'm not going to waste
> good money on it.
> And yes, I will criticise a movie after watching it. Want to hear
> what I think of "Orientation"?

Yes, tell me

> >
> >Happy new year to every one sincere
>
> Flunk! Non-confront. I will repeat the question:
> Trivia Question: What was the name of the frenchman who killed
> himself after being hassled by your sect, and which French head of
> Scientology was convicted for manslaughter in relation to this?
>

Well, you are not my twin, so your flunk is very funny. When you're a
real auditor, golden age of tech completed, you will give me a flunk.
The French man you're talking about (I can't remember the name)was drunk
most of time. I know because I was in the area of Lyon and I meet him at
that time. The members of the Dianetic Center didn't want to audit him
and they didn't because he wasn't in a good shape and sessionable. He
wasn't a Scientologist and hadn't done anything except starting a basic
course. You probably know that the CAN is prohibited in USA. We have a
similar organization in France : ADFI. But the ADFI is still active and
telling lies to everybody stupid enough to read only sensational papers.
In the trial most of their lies vanished : for example, they said for
years that the man killed himself because of a purification rundown. It
has been proved that he never started or even paid for it! Oneday ADFI
and all their lies will be stopped like the CAN in the USA, and the
truth will be widely known. The justice in France is completly controled
by the government. And governement give a huge amount of money to the
ADFI to stop small religions... If you want all the story you should get
a copy of the French Freedom.

So tell me, how can millions of people think about L.RON HUBBARD as
their best friend ? Do you think they are stupid ?

StukaFox

unread,
Dec 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/29/96
to

: So tell me, how can millions of people think about L.RON HUBBARD as


: their best friend ? Do you think they are stupid ?


You said it, not me.

Mike "Lying is cult policy" Beebe
--
A society without religion is like a crazed psychopath without a loaded .45

"We are not liars, we are telling the 100% truth (with some xceptions)"

-- Sean Jorden on the validity of racist
claims made on alt.politics.white-power

Message has been deleted

Eupraxist

unread,
Dec 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/29/96
to

Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>All about radiation is a very good book and not a controversial one.

I have a degree in medical physics and All About Radiation is risible
dogshit.
If you think it is "a very good book" it can only mean that you are
scientifically ignorant.

BTW, why did Lafayette lie and claim that he was a "nuclear physicist" on
the book jacket?


Richmann

unread,
Dec 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/29/96
to

Pierre wrote:
>
> I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
> nuclear power plant.

That's "Engineer".

...in a nuclear power plant ?
If something goes wrong, does it *just* have a core meltdown or is a
breeder that could blow up ?

What is the kill diameter ?

**********************************************************************
Richmann Rich...@videotron.ca
“Was mich nicht umbringt, macht mich stärker”
“That which does not kill me, makes me stronger” Nietzsche
**********************************************************************


Bev

unread,
Dec 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/29/96
to

Pierre wrote:
>
> Instead of criticizing Scientology, have you ever tried to audit (using
> the Dianetics technology) someone ? Have you seen result of good
> application of Scientology ?

After years and years of auditing to remove engrams from the
reactive mind, can you tell me the cognition for becoming a
Clear?

Auditing is an oxymoron when used with the term common sense.

Beverly

Bev

unread,
Dec 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/29/96
to

Richmann wrote:
>
> Pierre wrote:
> >
> > I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
> > nuclear power plant.
>
> That's "Engineer".
>
> ...in a nuclear power plant ?
> If something goes wrong, does it *just* have a core meltdown or is a
> breeder that could blow up ?
>
> What is the kill diameter ?

Don't worry about that, if it blows up, just thrown some water on the
area and all the radiation will go away. :-) Sigh, would that it were
that simple!!

Beverly

Bev

unread,
Dec 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/29/96
to

Pierre wrote:
>
> Sorry but Ex Mudder wrote:

> Well, you are not my twin, so your flunk is very funny. When you're a
> real auditor, golden age of tech completed, you will give me a flunk.

You are not not Hubbie-land here. In the outside world people are
capable of functioning without a twin and without a checksheet and
without LRH tech, and they do it extremely well.

> The French man you're talking about (I can't remember the name)was drunk
> most of time. I know because I was in the area of Lyon and I meet him at
> that time. The members of the Dianetic Center didn't want to audit him
> and they didn't because he wasn't in a good shape and sessionable. He
> wasn't a Scientologist and hadn't done anything except starting a basic
> course.

That is the same story used in many of these cases. Sorry but you have
Sea Org killing themselves as well. You have suicides, mysterious
deaths and psychotic breaks constantly in the Co$.

Also, if this guy was so terrible, why is it that Co$ had no problem
taking money from him and even going to his home asking for more?


> You probably know that the CAN is prohibited in USA. We have a
> similar organization in France : ADFI.

This TR doesn't work on a.r.s. Everyone here doesn't fall for the
old change the target trick. But of course, you are not to be blamed
for your attempt, after all, we know from being in Co$, and others on
the newsgroup who haven't been in but have seen it used on the NG
repeatedly and expectedly by Co$ members, that you are simply doing
nothing more than following your program.

After all what did we expect? Does it surprise us? :-)

Beverly

crystal kozar

unread,
Dec 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/29/96
to

Michael 'Mike' Gormez wrote:

>
> Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>
> > What is true is what is true for you.
>
> 4 + 4 = 6 That is true for me thus it must be the truth. Are you saying
> that?
>
> Mike,


Mike you are too deep...he he...Actually 4+4 is 8 and that is a fact,
which has nothing to do with truth. Truth is in the minds eye, but fact
is undisputable.
Crystal

Michael 'Mike' Gormez

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

Michael 'Mike' Gormez

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:

> I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
> nuclear power plant.

Fine, do you agree - as an "Ingeneer in a nuclear power plant" - with
the following from HCO BULLETIN OF 3 JANUARY 1980, "PURIFICATION
RUNDOWN AND ATOMIC WAR",

"And _that_ poses the interesting possibility that only Scien-
tologists will be functioning in areas experiencing heavy fallout
in an Atomic War.

Also, they'll know how to recover from a new exposure - another
short use of Niacin. And a bit of auditing of course.


L. RON HUBBARD
FOUNDER


LRH:gal
Copyright (C) 1980
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED"


Do you really believe that niacin and auditing can save people after
exposure ?


> Talking about Scientology or Scientologists is fun. But the best you
> could do is doing Scientology and that means being more ethic and
> efficient in life.

$cientology doesn't know the meaning of the word "ethic".
Ask Lisa. Oh sorry, I forgot, you can't. She died during $cientology
"care". Another word which is Marcabian for the scum-church.


Have fun reading and do give my regards to bigamist Hubbord, who is
hidding for the courts on Helatrobus.


DDG INFO US 20 July 1974

A/NATL SEC

RE: TYPEWRITER AWARD

Dear Greg:

When I was back at DC, about 2« months ago, you wrote and said that
I should write up for you the various cycles that I had worked on
and you would CSW for me an award on a typewriter for when
I came to US.

Currently, I am using Peter's typewriter, and am in need of one
of my own, so, following are the majority of the major cycles
I worked on at DC:

Enemy files personally obtained:

1. Interpol on Scientology
2. Numerous files on Interpol - their internal files
3. DC Police files (Dodell)
4. FDA trial files (Dodell)
5. Dodell PT data.
6. All Customs withheld FOI files
7. Regional Labor Department files on their investigation into FCDC
8. National Labor files re minimum wage regulations, Church matters,
etc., and verificationof no National Labor files on Scientology.
9. Files re pending FOI hearings in Congress, giving the Justice
plans
10. Scandal files on DEA including the Defeo report and background
material on the DeFeo repor
11. Files on our FOI cases with Justice (prior to an FSM being used)
12. Files re the AMA's attorneys including scandal data on the AMA
and data re Scientology.
13. Files on the St. Pete Times case re the St. Pete Times' attorneys
in DC
14. Miscellaneous Silver files on Scientology
15. Small amount of US Postal Service files on Scientology
16. Files re the IP move from Treas to Justice from the area senior
to IP in Justice
17. OIO files re LRH/MSH

I have been the CO for the obtaining of the following files:

1. All IP material not personally obtained
2. The majority of Silver material included the indexed documents,
PT data on the audit in Hawaii and Calif, etc., plus numerous
miscellaneous files on Scientology and other areas.
3. Dea file on Scientology; DEA scandal data re IP and other groups
4. All Justice files not personally obtained
5. 1361 Target 17 files
6. Some of the APA files on Scientology and APA scandal data
7. Some of the Ginsberg, Feldman and Bress files, not on Scientology
8. Some of the AMA files
9. Some of the CPDB files

Nice cult you have their - Mike,

MikeSmith3

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

On Sun, 29 Dec 1996 20:41:03 GMT, (Tilman Hausherr) wrote:

>In <32C690...@club-internet.fr>, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>
>wrote:

-----del

>What is your opinion on cocaine ? And have you ever tried it yourself ?
>
>Same question for heroine, marijuana, LST, speed, etc.

So is this how Tilman gets paid?

>Tilman
>


MikeSmith3

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

Apparently the coal in Bev's Christmas stocking accounts for her
vexed mood this week.

David Gerard

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

On Sun, 29 Dec 1996 13:59:06 GMT, Tilman Hausherr <til...@xenu.com> wrote:
:In <32C661...@club-internet.fr>, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:

:>I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
:>nuclear power plant.

: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


:Now you've really scared me!
:What is your professional opinion on the accuracy of "All about Radiation"?

Indeed. Homer Simpson, asleep with an empty donut box in front of him,
is the image that comes to mind.

--
http://www.suburbia.net/~fun/scn -- email me if it doesn't work for you
http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~gerard/ (European mirror)
mailto: f...@suburbia.net f...@tertius.net.au

Ralph Hilton

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

On Sun, 29 Dec 1996 20:41:03 GMT, til...@xenu.com (Tilman Hausherr)
wrote:

> RADIATION AND LIQUIDS (p47)
> On the Purification, findings seem to bear out that there
> is a factor related to radiation that produces the greatest
> exudation of it and that it is the sweating itself.
> Radiation is apparently water-soluble, as well as water
> removable. According to researchers, one merely has to take
> a hose to a building surface or a road to wash the radiation
> off of it. This factor is well known to defense trained
> personnel.
>
So some idiots take the piss by taking this too literally. Many of the
products from a nuclear explosion, particularly the ones easily
assimilated by the human body are water soluble. e.g. Strontium 90.
(as the hydroxide).


--

Ralph Hilton

Anti-Cult

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

On Sun, 29 Dec 1996 13:19:57 +0100.
Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>.
From: Grolier Interactive Europe.
Wrote on the subject: Simply Scientologist:

>I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
>nuclear power plant.
>

>Talking about Scientology or Scientologists is fun. But the best you
>could do is doing Scientology and that means being more ethic and

>efficient in life. That also mean being free from any drug or stress.
>That also mean being able to really help people, and I know what is
>help, after saving life of member of my familly who were sverely ill.
>

>And you, have you ever really helped ?
>

May God protect us from scientologists in nuclear power plants. The
security risk when one of these mentally instable people get attacked
by their Body Thetans is more than we need here in Europe. Can someone
please inform his employeer that this security risk is mentally
disturbed and can be attacked by dead space aliens while doing his
job. Isn't working in a nuclear power plant security classed in
France? It sure is in Sweden.

Jesus Christ (R6), no more Chernobyl.

(Anti-Cult) http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/index.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------
Search terms: OT, Hubbard, NOTS, Secret, Xenu, Xemu.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Victimized by the Co$."Deadfiled" in at least one Org.Seen too
much,heard to much,lived too much. Security Coded hard disks
too much. Have been reading NOTS too much. Having chronic
pneumonia. As Arnold said: I'll be back.......
---------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ One drop of drops in the river of life ~
~ Has not the power to float by itself ~
~ But there's this demand on every drop: ~
~ Help keep the other ones up ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Pierre

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

Tilman Hausherr wrote:
>
> In <32C690...@club-internet.fr>, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>
> wrote:
>
> >I've studied a lot about radiation and neutronic (sorry I'm not sure of
> >the translation). All about radiation is completely true and is wise to
> >give the point of view of the mental effect of radiation.
>
> Sorry, but "All about radiation" deals not only with the "mental
> effects" of radiation.
Right, but this aspect is treated in that book for the first time. And
you can see that people are scared about radiation because they don't
know what it is, this is a weird effect of the radiations.

>
> Do you agree that:
>
> - radiation can be "sweatened out" ?
Not the radiation itself but the particle who cause the radiation, yes.
That's exactly what we do in a nuclear power plant : we wash things.

> - niacin helps to "run out" radiation ?
Of course, have you done the purification rundown ? Have you felt and
SEEN an old sunburn vanishing ?

> - scientologists get immune from radiation ?
Not at all, they are more resistant if they have done the purification
rundown because they start from zero.

>
> And here a good one from clear body, clear mind:


>
> RADIATION AND LIQUIDS (p47)
> On the Purification, findings seem to bear out that there
> is a factor related to radiation that produces the greatest
> exudation of it and that it is the sweating itself.
> Radiation is apparently water-soluble, as well as water
> removable. According to researchers, one merely has to take
> a hose to a building surface or a road to wash the radiation
> off of it. This factor is well known to defense trained
> personnel.
>

> >Don't mix-up civil nuclear and nuclear weapon.
>

> But civil and military radiation is the same.
Yes but not the same amount. For example you will receive 10 or 100
times the amount of radiation I've received in a year when you take the
plane (high altitude->cosmic radiations).

>
> >All about radiation is a very good book and not a controversial one.
>

> It is certainly controversial, like scientology itself.
That's what you say, and you can say what you want.

>
> >In the trial most of their lies vanished : for example, they said for
> >years that the man killed himself because of a purification rundown. It
> >has been proved that he never started or even paid for it! Oneday ADFI
> >and all their lies will be stopped like the CAN in the USA, and the
> >truth will be widely known. The justice in France is completly controled
> >by the government. And governement give a huge amount of money to the
> >ADFI to stop small religions... If you want all the story you should get
> >a copy of the French Freedom.
>

> You are playing with words. That he suicided was indeed *because* of the
> purif - because his wife refused to pay it. In fact, you have not even
> *alleged* in your paragraph that ADFI ever claimed he killed himself
> *before* - you just hope that the reader believes this !
>
> This is definitively not a good start for you, Pierre: people might
> believe you are not very honest, and that you are a propagandist.
>
> I have read the sentence from the court. You obviously not.
??? Are you kidding or what ? Who is talking about honesty ?
In all the papers it was written for example that the purification
rundown was one of the cause of its death... And that was what ADFI said
during these past years. If you think I'm a propagandist, I don't care.
ADFI always say Scientology is a cult but never say that it has obtained
full recognition if USA, the land of the mother Church. And that's only
an example of the good willingness of the CAN/ADFI

> Btw, what is your processing and training level ?
CLASS IV Internship not completed. I won't tell you the rest because I
don't want to be criticized about my case.

> >Instead of criticizing Scientology, have you ever tried to audit (using
> >the Dianetics technology) someone ? Have you seen result of good
> >application of Scientology ?
>

> What is your opinion on cocaine ? And have you ever tried it yourself ?

No but I don't know millions of people happy to be involved in. And
whatever you can say, there are people who really enjoy Scientology and
they don't look like weird people.


>
> Same question for heroine, marijuana, LST, speed, etc.

Good question, there is a campain from the Church which is say no to
drug. Do you have children ? If yes, you would be happy if you see
booklet from the chuch all around aginst drug.
>
> Tilman
>
The day that we can trust each other, there will be peace ont earth.
L. Ron Hubbard

Maybe one day...

Pierre

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

Eupraxist wrote:

>
> Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
> >All about radiation is a very good book and not a controversial one.
>
> I have a degree in medical physics and All About Radiation is risible
> dogshit.
> If you think it is "a very good book" it can only mean that you are
> scientifically ignorant.
>
> BTW, why did Lafayette lie and claim that he was a "nuclear physicist" on
> the book jacket?
Great for your degree, but I am engeneer and studied neutronic, so who
is right ?

Ex Mudder

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

Ya know, people look at me funny when I comment that I worry about
Scientology getting, or building, nuclear weapons.

Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>Sorry but Ex Mudder wrote:

>> >> Well, you are French, so no cracks about the effectiveness of the
>> >> Comm Course.
>> And here I though I was being nice... after all, LRH tech is
>> supposed to be able to teach you to talk to anyone, any time, and
>> language.
>Sorry, it wasn't nice at all. I think we don't have the same point of
>view of being nice.
>

No, we don't.
Ain't that nice?


>
>> >What is true is what is true for you. Do you criticize a movie only
>> >after reading the papers or after watching it ? Do the same with
>> >Scientology.
>> If people I turst say the movie will suck, I'm not going to waste
>> good money on it.
>> And yes, I will criticise a movie after watching it. Want to hear
>> what I think of "Orientation"?
>Yes, tell me
>

After watching the movie "Orientation" I wanted to either blow my
brains out or jump off a bridge.
Anything other than be subjected to that kind of bullshit.


>>
>> Flunk! Non-confront. I will repeat the question:
>> Trivia Question: What was the name of the frenchman who killed
>> himself after being hassled by your sect, and which French head of
>> Scientology was convicted for manslaughter in relation to this?
>>

>Well, you are not my twin, so your flunk is very funny.

Twin? whazzat?

>When you're a
>real auditor, golden age of tech completed, you will give me a flunk.

You mean after I've forked over my life savings to learn to ask
personal questions of someone holding electrodes?
No thanks.

>The French man you're talking about (I can't remember the name)was drunk
>most of time. I know because I was in the area of Lyon and I meet him at
>that time.

You met him multiple times, and he was drunk each time? or you met
him once, and someone told you he was drunk?
Remember, whats true is whats true for you... not for me.

>The members of the Dianetic Center didn't want to audit him
>and they didn't because he wasn't in a good shape and sessionable. He
>wasn't a Scientologist and hadn't done anything except starting a basic
>course.

Just bought a few books and taken a course or two, right?

>You probably know that the CAN is prohibited in USA.

You hear that? Scientology is telling their members CAN was
prohibited in the US?
Sorry to break it to you, CAN was sued into backruptcy. Cept the
guy who sued them decided that was a bad thing, and is negotiating to
let them out of backruptcy. CAN is alive and weel, only under a
different name. (scientologists bought the old name)

>We have a


>similar organization in France : ADFI. But the ADFI is still active and
>telling lies to everybody stupid enough to read only sensational papers.

Of course, anyone who opposes Scientology is a liar.
Well, its true for you so I guess it must be true!

>In the trial most of their lies vanished : for example, they said for
>years that the man killed himself because of a purification rundown. It
>has been proved that he never started or even paid for it!

Right... he couldn't come up with the money, and Scientologists
kept harassing him until he jumped out of a window to get away.
Makes you feel proud that someone would rather be dead than a
Scientologist?

>Oneday ADFI
>and all their lies will be stopped like the CAN in the USA, and the
>truth will be widely known.

See above, CAN is alive and well and much more trusted than
Scientology, the "Thrving Cult of Greed and Power"

>The justice in France is completly controled by the government.

"The Govt." is awfully vague. Who controlls the justice? the
courts? they're the govt, aren't they?

>And governement give a huge amount of money to the
>ADFI to stop small religions... If you want all the story you should get
>a copy of the French Freedom.

Why? so I can make fun of it?


>
>So tell me, how can millions of people think about L.RON HUBBARD as
>their best friend ? Do you think they are stupid ?

Well..... given that there are no millions of people who believe
that (only about 100,000 we can verify) and that millions, make that
10s of millions, think he is a lying con artist...
What do you think?

Did I tell you the story about how the NOTS packs, OT 2-7, are
available to anyone who asks for them from the Swedish Government?

Do you mind if I call you a Clam?

Tell me, does the bridge really cost $360,000 US?
Who gets the money?

Bev

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

MikeSmith3 wrote:
>
> On Sun, 29 Dec 1996 23:17:04 -0500, Bev <dbj...@iag.net> wrote:
>
> >Pierre wrote:
>
> >> Well, you are not my twin, so your flunk is very funny. When you're a

> >> real auditor, golden age of tech completed, you will give me a flunk.
> >
> >You are not not Hubbie-land here. In the outside world people are
> >capable of functioning without a twin and without a checksheet and
> >without LRH tech, and they do it extremely well.
> >
> >That is the same story used in many of these cases. Sorry but you have
> >Sea Org killing themselves as well. You have suicides, mysterious
> >deaths and psychotic breaks constantly in the Co$.
> >
> >Also, if this guy was so terrible, why is it that Co$ had no problem
> >taking money from him and even going to his home asking for more?
> >
> >
> >> You probably know that the CAN is prohibited in USA. We have a

> >> similar organization in France : ADFI.
> >
> >This TR doesn't work on a.r.s. Everyone here doesn't fall for the
> >old change the target trick. But of course, you are not to be blamed
> >for your attempt, after all, we know from being in Co$, and others on
> >the newsgroup who haven't been in but have seen it used on the NG
> >repeatedly and expectedly by Co$ members, that you are simply doing
> >nothing more than following your program.
> >
> >After all what did we expect? Does it surprise us? :-)
>
> Apparently the coal in Bev's Christmas stocking accounts for her
> vexed mood this week.

Thank you for the validation, I'm going to give you a "Pass" because
I am enjoying that your sense of humor has improved a bit :-)

Beverly

Bev

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

David Gerard wrote:
>
> On Sun, 29 Dec 1996 13:59:06 GMT, Tilman Hausherr <til...@xenu.com> wrote:
> :In <32C661...@club-internet.fr>, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>
> :>I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
> :>nuclear power plant.

> : ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> :Now you've really scared me!
> :What is your professional opinion on the accuracy of "All about Radiation"?
>
> Indeed. Homer Simpson, asleep with an empty donut box in front of him,
> is the image that comes to mind.

In this case, lets make that an empty "croissant" box :-)

Beverly

Tilman Hausherr

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

In <32C7B2...@club-internet.fr>, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>
wrote:

>> Do you agree that:
>>
>> - radiation can be "sweatened out" ?
>Not the radiation itself but the particle who cause the radiation, yes.
>That's exactly what we do in a nuclear power plant : we wash things.

That's not the same. You "wash things" to get rid of the particles at
the surface.

Do you believe that you would be able to "sweat out" Plutonium ?

>> - niacin helps to "run out" radiation ?

>Of course, have you done the purification rundown ? Have you felt and
>SEEN an old sunburn vanishing ?

Sorry, but this is an effect of niacin, which is a vasodilatic:

===
" L'OXADILENE est un vaso-dilatateur classé au Tableau A. Il est donc
soumis à une réglementation spéciale et ne pouvait être délivré que sur
ordonnance médicale.
L'ORABILIX (bulamiodyl) est un produit de contraste iodé, à élimination
biliaire. Utilisé pour la réalisation de cholecystographies orales, qui
a été retiré du marché en 1986 pour des raisons économiques.
Concernant la troisième gélule, nous ne pouvons vous apporter aucune
information, puisque le produit n'a pas été identifié.
Aucun de ces médicaments n'est classé parmi les stupéfiants. "
===

Hubbard falsely interpreted this as "old sunburns".

See what happens to people who do the purif:

===
L'information judiciaire a permis de démontrer qu'elle avait audité de
nombreux adeptes : Jean CORALLO, Serge COSTANZO dont elle a également
supervisé la cure de purification.
A cet égard, ce dernier se souvient de l'enfer qu'il a vécu au cours de
ce programme : cinq heures de sauna par jour pendant sept jours
consécutifs, apparition de plaques rouges et sensations de brûlures sur
tout le corps (effets de la niacine), sensation de grande fatigue
jusqu'au bout des membres jusqu'à être tétanisé et devoir à la fin se
recroqueviller en position foetale.
La description des effets de la cure de purification par COSTANZO se
retrouve dans d'autres témoignages. Elle rend le sujet dépendant de son
auditeur qui, dès lors, dispose de tout pouvoir pour manier.
===

>> - scientologists get immune from radiation ?
>Not at all, they are more resistant if they have done the purification
>rundown because they start from zero.

Problem is that they don't start with zero.

Also, if you would actually run out radiation, the water from the
showers in the purif would be radioactive waste.

Since it isn't handled like that, either you are waste criminals, or
there isn't any radiation particles in that water.

>> And here a good one from clear body, clear mind:
>>
>> RADIATION AND LIQUIDS (p47)
>> On the Purification, findings seem to bear out that there
>> is a factor related to radiation that produces the greatest
>> exudation of it and that it is the sweating itself.
>> Radiation is apparently water-soluble, as well as water
>> removable. According to researchers, one merely has to take
>> a hose to a building surface or a road to wash the radiation
>> off of it. This factor is well known to defense trained
>> personnel.

no comment ?

Do you believe that Plutonium and other heavy metals can be sweatened
out ?

>> >Don't mix-up civil nuclear and nuclear weapon.


>>
>> But civil and military radiation is the same.

>Yes but not the same amount. For example you will receive 10 or 100
>times the amount of radiation I've received in a year when you take the
>plane (high altitude->cosmic radiations).

The amount depends on the circumstances. For example, some chernobyl
workers have got more than John Wayne.

>> >All about radiation is a very good book and not a controversial one.
>>

>> It is certainly controversial, like scientology itself.

>That's what you say, and you can say what you want.

Maybe you should word-clear "controversial".

>> You are playing with words. That he suicided was indeed *because* of the
>> purif - because his wife refused to pay it. In fact, you have not even
>> *alleged* in your paragraph that ADFI ever claimed he killed himself
>> *before* - you just hope that the reader believes this !
>>
>> This is definitively not a good start for you, Pierre: people might
>> believe you are not very honest, and that you are a propagandist.
>>
>> I have read the sentence from the court. You obviously not.

>??? Are you kidding or what ? Who is talking about honesty ?

>In all the papers it was written for example that the purification
>rundown was one of the cause of its death... And that was what ADFI said
>during these past years. If you think I'm a propagandist, I don't care.
>ADFI always say Scientology is a cult but never say that it has obtained
>full recognition if USA, the land of the mother Church. And that's only
>an example of the good willingness of the CAN/ADFI

Then post these papers, with exact sources. And please real ADFI papers.

Scientology has never received "full recognition" because there is none.
It is only tax exempt. You are misleading your readers.

>> Btw, what is your processing and training level ?

>CLASS IV Internship not completed. I won't tell you the rest because I
>don't want to be criticized about my case.

Oh pooor little victim. So you learned about communication, but can't
even handle a little criticism ?

>> >Instead of criticizing Scientology, have you ever tried to audit (using
>> >the Dianetics technology) someone ? Have you seen result of good
>> >application of Scientology ?
>>
>> What is your opinion on cocaine ? And have you ever tried it yourself ?

>No but I don't know millions of people happy to be involved in. And
>whatever you can say, there are people who really enjoy Scientology and
>they don't look like weird people.

Well, there are people who "really enjoy cocaine" and they don't like
weird. Your argument is flawed.

>>
>> Same question for heroine, marijuana, LST, speed, etc.

>Good question, there is a campain from the Church which is say no to
>drug. Do you have children ? If yes, you would be happy if you see
>booklet from the chuch all around aginst drug.

Sorry, but wasn't your argument that my children should first try drugs?

And didn't you know that scientology itself uses illegal drugs, a fact
that came up in the court decision ? (OXADILENE and ORABILIX)

Tilman

P.S. have you ever heard of Homer Simpson ?

Rebecca Jo McLaughlin

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

Pierre (pie...@club-internet.fr) wrote:

: Eupraxist wrote:
: >
: > Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
[snip]

: > BTW, why did Lafayette lie and claim that he was a "nuclear physicist" on
: > the book jacket?

: Great for your degree, but I am engeneer and studied neutronic, so who
: is right ?

I'm genuinely interested in your response to the above question about why
LRH lied about being a nuclear physicist. About why, in fact, he lied
about so much of his own background and achievements. Our OT/OSA
handlers routinely avoid confronting this subject. Perhaps you can do
better?

I am also interested in seeing the independent, peer-reviewed
studies (translation: wog science) that support the claimed beneficial
effects of the purif on ridding the body of radiation. Please
do post them here.

Thank you.

Beck


Eupraxist

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to


Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote in article
<32C7B3...@club-internet.fr>...


> Eupraxist wrote:
> >
> > Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:

> > >All about radiation is a very good book and not a controversial one.
> >

> > I have a degree in medical physics and All About Radiation is risible
> > dogshit.
> > If you think it is "a very good book" it can only mean that you are
> > scientifically ignorant.
> >

> > BTW, why did Lafayette lie and claim that he was a "nuclear physicist"
on
> > the book jacket?


> Great for your degree, but I am engeneer and studied neutronic, so who
> is right ?

Since medical physics is the study of the effects of all types of radiation
on bilogical systems (including humans), that means that I am right.

You deliberately ignored my question, so I will ask it again:

Why did Source lie and claim that he was a "nuclear physicist" on the book
jacket?


Scott Goehring

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <32C7B2...@club-internet.fr>,
Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:

>> Sorry, but "All about radiation" deals not only with the "mental
>> effects" of radiation.

>Right, but this aspect is treated in that book for the first
>time. And you can see that people are scared about radiation because
>they don't know what it is, this is a weird effect of the radiations.

this is not a particularly weird effect, nor is it peculiar to
radiation. people are generally afraid of the unknown.
unfortunately, after reading _All About Radiation_, one still knows
nothing about radiation; any sense of security thus acquired is thus
false.

>> - radiation can be "sweatened out" ?
>Not the radiation itself but the particle who cause the radiation, yes.
>That's exactly what we do in a nuclear power plant : we wash things.

washing radioactive particles off of something is not the same as
sweating. as any competent physiologist can tell you, sweat is very
nearly pure water; few, if any, radioisotopes (aside from H3 and the
various oxygen radioisotopes) will ever be eliminated from the body by
sweat. ElRon was not a competent physiologist.

>Of course, have you done the purification rundown ? Have you felt and
>SEEN an old sunburn vanishing ?

that's just nicotinic acid-induced peripheral vasodilation. nicotinic
acid is a pretty potent peripheral vasodilator.

>Not at all, they are more resistant if they have done the purification
>rundown because they start from zero.

the purification rundown does nothing at all to eliminate the
aftereffects of radiation exposure from the body; if anything, it
makes you more prone to permanent injury because of the stress it puts
on your liver, kidneys, and heart.

>> It is certainly controversial, like scientology itself.
>That's what you say, and you can say what you want.

ah, so since it's not true for you, it must not be true, eh? nice
wall of denial you have there.

>Good question, there is a campain from the Church which is say no to
>drug. Do you have children ? If yes, you would be happy if you see
>booklet from the chuch all around aginst drug.

i am annoyed that my children are exposed to the DARE anti-drug
propoganda as it is. keep your insipid literature away from them,
please. by the way, it's not that i approve of the indiscriminate use
of drugs; it's that i disapprove of the methods used by anti-drug
propogandists, be they Scientologists or not.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMsgJfc85mNScRcpVAQHl7QQAqkhIKFdd52s1r8OumjxDUXqOg94fzWef
M1bZWYdUaU+UECSUx0mq7Dje1DvMIimMzZMBJpa4LwZZuj8OtwM5K4dyEWKMeDIR
DLfAktsNCWP3GzA1qI1hnJMOxeB57VnTYxDWmNzNKHDuNOcWECnrosBDfU0UwTJe
68Sv6wz/EUI=
=XZW5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Keith Justified And Ancient Cochran

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

[Posted and e-mailed]

In article <32C7B2...@club-internet.fr>,
Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>
>That's what you say, and you can say what you want.

Remeber this, Pierre.

>> Btw, what is your processing and training level ?
>CLASS IV Internship not completed. I won't tell you the rest because I
>don't want to be criticized about my case.

Ok, let me tell you a little bit about your case:

After spending another couple of years (and more money), getting processing,
you may be able to take the clearing course, after which you will attest
to being "clear". The EP of the clearing course is when you realize that
you are mocking up your reactive mind.

However, once you discover that you don't have all the wonderful abilites
that Clears are supposed to have, they will sell you into take the OT
levels.

In OT I, you will learn to spot a Thetan, and spend more money. Total
abilities gained: None.

In OT II, you will once again go over the GPM end-words list, and spend
more money. Total abilities gained: None.

In OT III (The "Wall of Fire") you will once again spend more money, and
this time find out that all of your problems (like not having the perfect
memory that clears are supposed to have) are being caused by the souls
of your dead space alien brothers and sisters that were killed by Xenu
75,000,000 years ago. Total abilities gained: None.

This, however, is not the end of the story. Once you get through OT III,
and still discover that you have no OT abilities, you will be told to
spend more money to do NOTS, so you can exorcise the demons of your dead
space alien brothers and sisters who are comatose, who have done drugs,
who are from strange and exotic places, or that think they are you.
This will take you through OT IV, OTV, OTVI, and OTVII, cost you a lot
of money and time, and you will still gain no abilities.

And so, you will be convinced to take the final step, OT VIII, or "Truth
Revealed". In this step, you will audit all of your past lives until
they no longer "trouble" you.

Total cost: Some $360,000US. Total abilities gained: None.

You can find all this information out on the web pages in various places.
I suggest you start at Ron Newman's most excellent web page at
http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/scientology/home.html

Karin Spaink (http://www.xs4all.net/~kspaink/) has the information about
OT I, OT II, and OTIII.

Heldal (Various sites in *.no), or the Swedish Parliament will give you
the information about NOTS (OT IV, OT V, OT VI, OT VII).

The information about OT VIII has been posted by several people over the
last two years, and can be thought accurate considering the cult whines
every time they post it. The alternative OT VIII is where you learn that
Jesus was a pedophile.

Welcome to your future, Pierre. I hope you have lots of money to waste.

-- .sig and PGP Block follow. Visit http://www.dimensional.com/~janda/
^L
finger -l ja...@dimensional.com for my PGP public key block.

Support Dennis Erlich! Send cheques (any currency) payable to
Morrison & Foerster and labelled DENNIS ERLICH DEFENCE FUND to:
Carla Oakley/Katie Walsh, MORRISON & FOERSTER, 345 Californai St,
San Francisco, CA 94104-2675 Tel (415) 677-7700

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMsgQi22jF2vR4ZtNAQF8GAP9Eqctme1LV5jcRuLO0Xp+GEU6Ut9BsEWW
gYKyaqVK+xAjhkV7Zu5+EIBqeMjXWBJqkpUe379pUVi/cip3RjML+o5aeVa0cdIs
HuLJxX6yBeBqpqJE7BnoFLE2h/n4h9Ur96zJdBrbgTVJ25iSAgGeW1XWzoaxzS90
XQTbrAcpra0=
=ov8b
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Tilman Hausherr

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

In <32C6B7...@club-internet.fr>, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>
wrote:

>has been proved that he never started or even paid for it! Oneday ADFI


>and all their lies will be stopped like the CAN in the USA, and the
>truth will be widely known.

Well, it was scientology that was sentenced in 1992 for spreading lies
about ADFI. As usual, scientologists accuse other of what they have been
doing. In the example below, scientology was convicted for claiming that
"ADFI uses racist and hitlerian methods, has a doubious past and engages
in brainwashing." (funny, almost all applies to scientology !!)
Scientology had to pay damages + publication of the sentence in three
newspapers.

In the meantime, I also looked for old ADFI stuff on the web, and I
could nowhere find and proof of your allegation.

Tilman

=======

Le centre de Dianétique de Lille dépasse les bornes

BULLES, 3ème trimestre 1992.

La présidente et la vice-présidente du Centre de Dianétique de Lille
avaient adressé à des maires, des conseillers généraux et à tous les
conseillers municipaux de Lille des lettres contenant des injures
calomnieuses à l'égard de l'ADFI.

La quatrième chambre de la Cour d'Appel de Douai a confirmé, le 18 mars
1992, le jugement du tribunal de Police de Lille (14 janvier 1992). Elle
a estimé que Mme Rose-Marie Potaux avait manifestement franchi les
limites de la liberté de penser, de parler et d'écrire en soutenant que
l'ADFI "utilise des méthodes racistes et hitlériennes, qu'elle a un
passé douteux et qu'elle pratique des lavages de cerveaux".

"En assimilant consciemment et volontairement l'ADFI à un groupe
fascisant dont le dessein est de calomnier et de dénoncer tous les
mouvements nouveaux, les auteurs de l'écrit (le Centre Hubbard de
Dianétique et Mme Bertrand) ont volontairement et gravement dépassé les
limites tolérables de la liberté d'expression, commis la contravention
non publique assimilée à l'injure non publique et ont été justement
condamnés à une peine de 200 F d'amende".

Le Tribunal de Police a condamné le Centre Hubbard de Dianétique, pris
en la personne de ses représentants légaux et Madame Bertrand,
solidairement, à payer à l'ADFI la somme de 2.500 F à titre de dommages
et intérêts et celle de 1.000 F sur le fondement de l'article 475-1 du
Code de la Procédure Pénale. Mme Potaux a été condamnée à payer à l'ADFI
la somme de 2.500 F à titre de dommages et intérêts.

La Cour d'Appel de Douai a condamné en outre Mme Potaux à payer l'ADFI
une somme de 2.000 F sur le fondement de l'article 475-1 du Code de
Procédure Pénale et Mme Bertrand et le Centre Hubbard de Dianétique,
solidairement, une somme de 2.000 F sur le même fondement.

L'arrêt sera publié aux frais des condamnés dans les quotidiens Le
Monde, La Voix du Nord et Nord-Matin.

Scott Goehring

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <32C661...@club-internet.fr>,
Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:

>I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
>nuclear power plant.

what's an "Ingeneer"? or is the comm tech just not working today for
you?

>Talking about Scientology or Scientologists is fun.

a barrel of laughs, it is.

>But the best you could do is doing Scientology and that means being
>more ethic and efficient in life.

it's quite possible to be "efficient" and "ethic[al]" without
practicing Scientology. in fact, from what i've seen Scientology
makes people far less ethical (c.f. Mary Sue Hubbard, Mark Meisner,
Kendrick Moxon, Helena Kobrin), and doesn't seem to improve their
efficiency substantially, at least not over what any other
motivational training will do.

>That also mean being free from any drug or stress. That also mean
>being able to really help people, and I know what is help, after
>saving life of member of my familly who were sverely ill.

are you attesting to medical benefits of Scientology? admittedly,
you're French, but are you aware that Scientology is enjoined from
making medical claims in the United States by a federal court order?
also, i seem to recall that one of the charges against the criminal
Scientologists in Lyon was illegal practice of medicine.

>And you, have you ever really helped ?

i doubt there are many people over the age of about 2 who have never
helped someone in some way.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMsf+DM85mNScRcpVAQEVEQP/ekg+icbfMw/9vG32Fmu9IAgU2urm7MoV
FxInHyFgktBeGl/jF0Vsl1UpbNQRuRSaKdDHdaL6Xd3wh6QVkdBOzbg3TOb2Y4BV
99khafdtCzGcPnVriuu7Arw6TquqBOS3bfB0G3UbEJRRlIiYcFW8kAvlsEGU+hNL
CQlPMq1oQgM=
=USKQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Baba ROM DOS

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

sc...@poverty.bloomington.in.us (Scott Goehring) writes:

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

>In article <32C690...@club-internet.fr>,
>Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:

>>I've studied a lot about radiation and neutronic (sorry I'm not sure
>>of the translation).

>comm tech failing on you again, eh?

If you wish to bait Pierre on his communications skills, please
do so in French. His English is clearly better than Hubbard's command
of any of the foreign languages Hubbard claimed to speak "fluently".

>>All about radiation is completely true and is wise to give the point
>>of view of the mental effect of radiation.

>"All about radiation" is generally acknowledged by people with
>intelligence to be utter claptrap.

And dangerous claptrap at that.

> it's certainly grossly
>inconsistent with what we _know_ about radiation, both from military
>experimentation and in dealing with low-, medium-, and high-level
>contamination arising from accidents in civil operations (such as
>Three Mile Island and Chernobyl).

>>Don't mix-up civil nuclear and nuclear weapon.

>it's the same sort of radiation, although nuclear weapons do create a
>great deal more of it.

>>All about radiation is a very good book and not a controversial one.

>it's a utter lump of garbage; the only controversy is over why anyone
>should pay any attention to it at all. i am dumbstruck that someone
>who claims to be a nuclear engineer could read it without laughing out
>loud at the idiocy of the claims made therein.

Pierre:

Est-ce que vous avez vraiment lu "All About Radiation" de LRH?
En englais, ou en traduction francaise? Etes-vous sure que vous
l'avez bien compris? Voulez-vous repondre a la question suivante?

In the event of a serious breach of reactor containment, releasing
radiation into the environment, should the unfortunate residents of
the surrounding area be given

(a) Large doses of Niacin
(b) Large doses of Iodine
or (c) Dianetic Auditing?

Please explain your choice.

Scott Goehring

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <32C75E...@sk.sympatico.ca>,
crystal kozar <mc...@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote:

>Mike you are too deep...he he...Actually 4+4 is 8 and that is a fact,
>which has nothing to do with truth. Truth is in the minds eye, but
>fact is undisputable.

that's debatable. things like 4+4=8 are true becuase they follow from
definitions that we agree to accept as true, without knowing for
certain that there are true. for all you know, it's possible to
construct a meaningful system of mathematics where 4+4=6.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMsgwUM85mNScRcpVAQH2EQQAhqzCnyy93luAUW38D1feZlyhhhRyKAqH
Qsf+rINS8bBpNKgbZ+L0sh+RoGaVF1vbWsB8GxAB+1J0+ZtcbRdvub4VY/PuxbgJ
6pkmxwyco3oqN2Rwe9wpMWPeLEoAMJDZnf61+7E3BZKVh/TSKsSH21lrZvEtzlQo
GEmVdzELLHs=
=3YEh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Scott Goehring

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <5a9b7v$7...@murrow.corp.sgi.com>,


Baba ROM DOS <ba...@jones.neu.sgi.com> wrote:

>If you wish to bait Pierre on his communications skills, please
>do so in French. His English is clearly better than Hubbard's command
>of any of the foreign languages Hubbard claimed to speak "fluently".

normally, i would agree. however, Scientology claims to make people
"more able to communicate." since Pierre elected to communicate with
us in English, i expect that he is fully enabled to do so, by the
virtues of the unsurpassed Hubbard Communication Technology.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMsg1Ls85mNScRcpVAQEf2wP/eonV0zYFDeupsQ+9SO/8cDpqh4aYR9Lg
7tQIZSVw5Sx3m3NY7Y9CKzwLFMOLnPslPQPnCD0dhEEcnbWyQK0OXUpZ+nFioxsc
JZ5FMAL3FnpfKoE68F+kgYFwTbosfERRqEsZ5LWBgAI9kI9PMD9E7VZTDT8AbxCw
YAkyV+sQykc=
=IWjW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Pierre

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

> Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote in article
> <32C7B3...@club-internet.fr>...
> > Eupraxist wrote:
> > >
> > > Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
> > > >All about radiation is a very good book and not a controversial one.
> > >
> > > I have a degree in medical physics and All About Radiation is risible
> > > dogshit.
> > > If you think it is "a very good book" it can only mean that you are
> > > scientifically ignorant.
> > >
> > > BTW, why did Lafayette lie and claim that he was a "nuclear physicist"
> on
> > > the book jacket?
>
> > Great for your degree, but I am engeneer and studied neutronic, so who
> > is right ?
>
> Since medical physics is the study of the effects of all types of radiation
> on bilogical systems (including humans), that means that I am right.
>
> You deliberately ignored my question, so I will ask it again:
>
> Why did Source lie and claim that he was a "nuclear physicist" on the book
> jacket?

What do you think of being a student at one of the first study program
of Nuclear physic in university ? Other student of that time when L. Ron
Hubbard studied were involved in the development of nuclear bomb in
1940's.

Pierre

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

Anti-Cult wrote:
>
> On Sun, 29 Dec 1996 13:19:57 +0100.
> Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>.
> From: Grolier Interactive Europe.
> Wrote on the subject: Simply Scientologist:
>
> >I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
> >nuclear power plant.
> >
> >Talking about Scientology or Scientologists is fun. But the best you

> >could do is doing Scientology and that means being more ethic and
> >efficient in life. That also mean being free from any drug or stress.

> >That also mean being able to really help people, and I know what is
> >help, after saving life of member of my familly who were sverely ill.
> >
> >And you, have you ever really helped ?
> >
>
> May God protect us from scientologists in nuclear power plants. The
> security risk when one of these mentally instable people get attacked
> by their Body Thetans is more than we need here in Europe. Can someone
> please inform his employeer that this security risk is mentally
> disturbed and can be attacked by dead space aliens while doing his
> job. Isn't working in a nuclear power plant security classed in
> France? It sure is in Sweden.

I didn't know that being Scientologist was a crime or was dangerous for
the security. Do you know that the group on this planet wich uses less
alcool and drug is probably Scientologists.

And if Scientology is illegal to work in a nuclear power plant, who will
be next ? Mormons ? Judes ?

Baba ROM DOS

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> writes:

>Anti-Cult wrote:
>> Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>.


>> Wrote on the subject: Simply Scientologist:
>>
>> >I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
>> >nuclear power plant.
>>

>> May God protect us from scientologists in nuclear power plants...

>I didn't know that being Scientologist was a crime or was dangerous for
>the security.

My concern is that you might be called upon to make a decision in
a state of emergency that would require an understanding of the
effects of radiation on people and equipment. You profess to be
an adherant of a sect which teaches that the writings of L Ron
Hubbard are to be regarded as Revealed Truth and scientific fact.
Hubbard's understanding of radiation and its effects on living
things was hopelessly wrong. One does not need an advanced degree
to know this. In the US, most people are taught in high school
(the equivalent, more or less, of a French lycee) about the differences
between alpha and beta particles and gamma rays, and the decay
of radionucleides into further radioactive isotopes of common
elements that can become bound chemically into living tissues.
So to even moderately educated people, Hubbards statements about
living tissue blocking radiation differently than inert mass,
eliminating radiation poisoning through sweat-baths and near-toxic
doses of vitamins, etc, is fanciful nonsense. Someone who believes
these things in preference to the findings of "wog" science really
should not be in a position where they might need to make a decision
involving nuclear safety.

> Do you know that the group on this planet wich uses less
>alcool and drug is probably Scientologists.

I can think of several, starting with the Mormons.

>And if Scientology is illegal to work in a nuclear power plant, who will
>be next ? Mormons ? Judes ?

If any religious group gets excluded from working in French nuclear
reactors, it's likely to be the Muslim's, don't you think? I would
imagine, given the present sociopolitical climate, that they are
already screening out "integristes", ne'est-ce pas? But that's not
the point. There is no conflict between the teachings of Islam,
Mormonism, or Judaism and the operation of a nuclear reactor.
There *is* a conflict between the teachings of Scientology[tm]
and the management of nuclear accidents, which sadly do happen
from time to time.

I would not, by the same token, want to see an adherent to a Christian
sect that does not believe in modern medicine (and there are several)
be eligible to work in a hospital emergency room. I would worry that
they might decide to pray for me rather than administer a necessary
transfusion. It is not a question of whether they have a right to
believe as they wish, but a question of a conflict between their
beliefs and the work of a hospital.

Bev

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

Pierre wrote:

>
> Bev wrote:
>
> > That is the same story used in many of these cases. Sorry but you have
> > Sea Org killing themselves as well. You have suicides, mysterious
> > deaths and psychotic breaks constantly in the Co$.
> >
> Generalities...

No, FACTS!! Of course, with the Co$ training I have witnessed it is
not surprising to see that like every other Co$ member that has come
here you are also unable to digest and must deny.

I was hoping you might be different. But I do thank you for demonstrating
to readers the easiness that Co$ members shoo away any negative things
that happen within their "confines" to remain in the demented state of
bliss attained via lack of critical thought and an ability to duplicate
anything other than TR's.

Beverly

Shy....@edenbbs.com

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

> I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also
> Ingeneer in a nuclear power plant.

God save us all!

> Talking about Scientology or Scientologists is fun. But
> the best you could do is doing Scientology and that
> means being more ethic and efficient in life. That also
> mean being free from any drug or stress. That also mean
> being able to really help people, and I know what is help,
> after saving life of member of my familly who were sverely
> ill.

Obviously you have learned nothing about Scientology during
those eight years. What a goddamned waste of time. And
money too of course.

> And you, have you ever really helped ?

Pad the butt-fucking cult's pockets with money? NEVER!


Bev

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

Pierre wrote:

> Eupraxist wrote:
> >
> > You deliberately ignored my question, so I will ask it again:
> >
> > Why did Source lie and claim that he was a "nuclear physicist" on the book
> > jacket?
>
> What do you think of being a student at one of the first study program
> of Nuclear physic in university ? Other student of that time when L. Ron
> Hubbard studied were involved in the development of nuclear bomb in
> 1940's.

This is how Co$ members (and unknowing public) become deceived by
information from Co$. It is called an "Acceptable Lie". Yes, Hub
attended George Washington University, Yes, Hub was a student in one
of the first Nuclear Physics classes there.

Now, what is missing? The fact that the Hub was also given the much
honored distinction of being among the FIRST TO FAIL in course. You
know, an "F", as in being incapable of learning the facts necessary
to understand and then pass the course.

Therefore, to say he was a student in one of the first courses is
true, Co$'s "Acceptable Lie", because the whole truth is he had a complete
inability to graduate the course. He also went on to NOT be able
to complete his stay at the university and never received a degree.

Pierre, it is very hard to see an Icon crumble before your eyes, but
I implore you to investigate the true facts behind the braggadoccio
and delusions of Mr. Hubbard. It will be hard, I know, but you will
be a better person for it.

Beverly

Alan Furman

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

sc...@poverty.bloomington.in.us (Scott Goehring) wrote:

>...for all you know, it's possible to


>construct a meaningful system of mathematics where 4+4=6.

"If 4+4=6 for you, then 4+4=6."

Done. Just call me Source.

Now RINSE THOSE SHIRTS!

--
====al...@aimnet.com * LPC * LPUSA * ISIL * IOS * KoX * Netscab Squealer====
LEGALIZE FREEDOM >>>> http://www.lp.org * UBI LIBERTAS IBI PATRIA
"Losers go to Washington." - T.J. Rodgers on government-industry partnerships

Martin Hunt

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

In article <32C7B3...@club-internet.fr>,

Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
}Eupraxist wrote:
}>
}> Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
}> >All about radiation is a very good book and not a controversial one.
}>
}> I have a degree in medical physics and All About Radiation is risible
}> dogshit.
}> If you think it is "a very good book" it can only mean that you are
}> scientifically ignorant.
}>
}> BTW, why did Lafayette lie and claim that he was a "nuclear physicist" on
}> the book jacket?

}Great for your degree, but I am engeneer and studied neutronic, so who
}is right ?

Pierre, if I can read through your English, I believe you are claming
to be a nuclear engineer. You've said you think that Hubbard's quasi-
science BS in _All About Radiation_ is, what, "science"? You agree
with it? I'm asking; maybe by "very good book" you mean very good
science fiction, a novel.

You have, of course, read _Understanding the E-Meter_, and there's
a good bit of Hubbardian "physics" in it. Do you think it is good
science? Do you disagree with any of it?

Let me refresh your memory about some of the things Hubbard says:

"If life - or theta, as it is called in Scientology - is a mirror
and creator of motion which can be mirrored, it follows then that
mirror-wise, the whole of the laws of motion, magnetism, energy,
matter, space and time can be found in thought, and behavior and
even thinking partake of the physical-universe laws regarding
matter, energy, space and time. The physical universe consists
of four parts: Matter Energy Space Time." - page 5.

I have no objection to thought being a physical thing; I have no
doubt this is true, but Hubbard does not mention and appears to not
know what the four basic forces are! Where's the mention of gravity,
e.g.? Did Hubbard ever describe the four basic forces of the universe?
It seems he may not have known about them, but I'm certain that
knowledge of them was commonplace, especially for "nuclear physicists",
as Hubbard claimed to be. This book is copyright 1988; I do not
know the original date. BTW, Pierre, what are the four basic
forces? :-)

Do you agree with these aspects of Hubbardian cosmology*?

"Space is caused by looking out from a point" - page 6.
"Space, then, is not an arbitrary and absolute but is creatable
or uncreatable by a being" - page 10.

"Matter is a condensation of energy. The more energy condenses,
the less space it occupies and the greater its endurance becomes.
Energy becomes matter if condensed. Matter becomes energy if
dispersed. One cannot consider matter without also considering
energy." - page 12.

This, while giving a general idea of E=Mc^2, almost reads like
it was hastily scrawled by a first-year student who was either
sleeping through his physics class or out practicing how to use
a glider instead of actually studying. Is this all that remains
of Hubbard's Coles Notes version of nuclear physics many years
on from his classes at "old GW", where he flunked out miserably?

On page 14, Hubbard cites _Omni_. All I'll say about that rag was
summed up neatly by someone, I forget who, but the phrase is
memorable, if you know who Bob Gucionne (sp?) is: "Omni is the
pornography of science".

"Time is the comotion of particles" - page 16.

Do I need to go on? Hubbard continues with some 100 pages of this
bullshit, accompanied with numerous neophytic drawings and diagrams,
amply displaying his profound ignorance of the whole subject of
physics.

*apparently, a subset of neo-rubbish or modern quasi-science, as
seen and expressed in the American pulps of the 1930s, in which
Einsteinian (occasionally even Newtonian) cosmologies are
disregarded, along with such things as inertia, Relativity,
gravity, etc.

--
$cientologists on the lam: Suzanne Schnuremberger, Ildiko Cannovas
and Laura Arrunada, wanted for questioning concerning the mysterious
death of Lisa McPherson in Clearwater, FLA.


Lars Westergren

unread,
Dec 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/30/96
to

Ralph Hilton wrote:
>
> On Sun, 29 Dec 1996 20:41:03 GMT, til...@xenu.com (Tilman Hausherr)
> wrote:
>
> >
> > RADIATION AND LIQUIDS (p47)
> > On the Purification, findings seem to bear out that there
> > is a factor related to radiation that produces the greatest
> > exudation of it and that it is the sweating itself.
> > Radiation is apparently water-soluble, as well as water
> > removable. According to researchers, one merely has to take
> > a hose to a building surface or a road to wash the radiation
> > off of it. This factor is well known to defense trained
> > personnel.
> >
> So some idiots take the piss by taking this too literally. Many of the
> products from a nuclear explosion, particularly the ones easily
> assimilated by the human body are water soluble. e.g. Strontium 90.
> (as the hydroxide).

Some products maybe. But not all. And when you have radiation
in your body I doubt a sauna is going to help (though I love
to take a sauna, or bastu as we call it in Sweden, now and then).

I am not very good at physics, but from my college days I
seem to remember that a thick lead sheet was what you wanted
nearby when alpha, beta and especially gamma radiation started
to come, not a water hose.

Best wishes,
Lars


"Advertising. The right (of rich corporations)
to choose (to screw with your mind)."

Pierre

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

Pierre

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

Bev wrote:
>
> Richmann wrote:

> >
> > Pierre wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
> > > nuclear power plant.
> >
> > That's "Engineer".
> >
> > ...in a nuclear power plant ?
> > If something goes wrong, does it *just* have a core meltdown or is a
> > breeder that could blow up ?
> >
> > What is the kill diameter ?
>
> Don't worry about that, if it blows up, just thrown some water on the
> area and all the radiation will go away. :-) Sigh, would that it were
> that simple!!

Like you Beverly

Baba ROM DOS

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> writes:

>Baba ROM DOS wrote:
>>
>> >>All about radiation is a very good book and not a controversial one.
>>

>> >it's a utter lump of garbage; the only controversy is over why anyone
>> >should pay any attention to it at all. i am dumbstruck that someone
>> >who claims to be a nuclear engineer could read it without laughing out
>> >loud at the idiocy of the claims made therein.
>>
>> Pierre:
>>
>> Est-ce que vous avez vraiment lu "All About Radiation" de LRH?
>> En englais, ou en traduction francaise? Etes-vous sure que vous
>> l'avez bien compris? Voulez-vous repondre a la question suivante?
>

>En Francais, et je pense l'avoir compris. Je l'ai lu il y a plusieurs
>Annees.

Je dois dire, alors, que c'est possible (mais j'en doute) que le traducteur
a corrige les pires bettises. Mais je vous assure qu'en version originale,
il y a plein de conneries.

>> In the event of a serious breach of reactor containment, releasing
>> radiation into the environment, should the unfortunate residents of
>> the surrounding area be given
>>
>> (a) Large doses of Niacin
>> (b) Large doses of Iodine
>> or (c) Dianetic Auditing?
>>
>> Please explain your choice.
>

>First, a large dose of Iodine, for sure, because civil reactor release
>large quantities of Iode, not nuclear bomb (Should be confirmed). This
>is common-sense
>And Niacine in a purification rundown of course to clean-up the effects.


I rather expected that you would say "all three", but at least you got
it in the right order. Now, think a moment about *why* large doses of
iodine are given. It is because, as you say, radioactive iodine is
a byproduct of nuclear fission, and it is absorbed by the body in the
thyroid gland. One gives iodine to people at risk of exposure in order
to saturate the thyroid, so that the radioiodine is not absorbed. If
it *is* absorbed, it is bound chemically into thyroid hormones. Once
this happens, no amount of perspiration, even unto death, will eliminate
it. You know this, right? Similarly, you know that ionizing radiation
burns tissues and damages genes, right? The radiation has gone, but
the damage to cells is still there. How can one "sweat out" damage
to cells? It's not a substance, it is a structural state of affairs.
You understand this, don't you?

>Dianetic auditing could be a very good help if you have received a huge
>amount of radiation.

Yes, if they had received a sufficiently large amount of radiation, it
is possible that Dianetic auditing might be of comfort to the dying.
Provided, of course, they survived long enough to get those Big Wins
before the Long Night.

Pierre

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

Scott Goehring wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> In article <5a9b7v$7...@murrow.corp.sgi.com>,
> Baba ROM DOS <ba...@jones.neu.sgi.com> wrote:
>
> >If you wish to bait Pierre on his communications skills, please
> >do so in French. His English is clearly better than Hubbard's command
> >of any of the foreign languages Hubbard claimed to speak "fluently".
>
> normally, i would agree. however, Scientology claims to make people
> "more able to communicate." since Pierre elected to communicate with
> us in English, i expect that he is fully enabled to do so, by the
> virtues of the unsurpassed Hubbard Communication Technology.

Thank you, is this a cult here or do I need a private pass ?
Thank you for your agreement.

Tilman Hausherr

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

In <32C83B...@club-internet.fr>, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>
wrote:

>What do you think of being a student at one of the first study program
>of Nuclear physic in university ? Other student of that time when L. Ron
>Hubbard studied were involved in the development of nuclear bomb in
>1940's.

You forgot that Elron failed. By your logic, you would be able to drive
if another student of the driving school later bought shares of a car
company.

Tilman

Ralph Hilton

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

On 30 Dec 1996 21:12:31 GMT, ba...@jones.neu.sgi.com (Baba ROM DOS)
wrote:

>sc...@poverty.bloomington.in.us (Scott Goehring) writes:
>
>>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>

>>In article <32C690...@club-internet.fr>,


>>Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>
>>>I've studied a lot about radiation and neutronic (sorry I'm not sure
>>>of the translation).
>
>>comm tech failing on you again, eh?
>

>If you wish to bait Pierre on his communications skills, please
>do so in French. His English is clearly better than Hubbard's command
>of any of the foreign languages Hubbard claimed to speak "fluently".
>

>>>All about radiation is completely true and is wise to give the point
>>>of view of the mental effect of radiation.
>
>>"All about radiation" is generally acknowledged by people with
>>intelligence to be utter claptrap.
>
>And dangerous claptrap at that.
>
>> it's certainly grossly
>>inconsistent with what we _know_ about radiation, both from military
>>experimentation and in dealing with low-, medium-, and high-level
>>contamination arising from accidents in civil operations (such as
>>Three Mile Island and Chernobyl).
>
>>>Don't mix-up civil nuclear and nuclear weapon.
>
>>it's the same sort of radiation, although nuclear weapons do create a
>>great deal more of it.
>

>>>All about radiation is a very good book and not a controversial one.
>
>>it's a utter lump of garbage; the only controversy is over why anyone
>>should pay any attention to it at all. i am dumbstruck that someone
>>who claims to be a nuclear engineer could read it without laughing out
>>loud at the idiocy of the claims made therein.
>
>Pierre:
>
>Est-ce que vous avez vraiment lu "All About Radiation" de LRH?
>En englais, ou en traduction francaise? Etes-vous sure que vous
>l'avez bien compris? Voulez-vous repondre a la question suivante?
>

>In the event of a serious breach of reactor containment, releasing
>radiation into the environment, should the unfortunate residents of
>the surrounding area be given
>
>(a) Large doses of Niacin
>(b) Large doses of Iodine
>or (c) Dianetic Auditing?
>
>Please explain your choice.

d) None of the above.

They should be given very large doses of water and a book of prayers.
This flushes out that which can be flushed out and gives them a hope
in Hell.


--

Ralph Hilton

MikeSmith3

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

On 30 Dec 1996 16:56:59 +0100, Alvin Brattli

------del

>In doing science, and using scientific methods, you *have* to be
>stringent, and you must take what people say and write literally.
>This also works the other way round; on writing something, you must
>expect that people take it literally, and adjust your writing style to
>that. If you cannot clearly communicate what you mean, you are not
>doing a good piece of work, and you are bound to be misunderstood,
>criticized, and/or ridiculed by other scientists.

>aLViN
This quite convincing coming from a chipmunk.

Ex Mudder

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

sc...@poverty.bloomington.in.us (Scott Goehring) wrote:
>In article <32C75E...@sk.sympatico.ca>,
>crystal kozar <mc...@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>>Mike you are too deep...he he...Actually 4+4 is 8 and that is a fact,
>>which has nothing to do with truth. Truth is in the minds eye, but
>>fact is undisputable.
>
>that's debatable. things like 4+4=8 are true becuase they follow from
>definitions that we agree to accept as true, without knowing for
>certain that there are true. for all you know, it's possible to

>construct a meaningful system of mathematics where 4+4=6.

Well, 2+2=5, for sufficiently large values of 2.

4+4=8 (in any base 9+) because it is self consistant, and because
it works.
You can construct a mathamatical system wherein 4+4=6. but it
wouldn't do you a hell of a lot of good.
Hell, I remember fooling around with base -2 in college. That was
amusing...


Ex Mudder's home page: http://www.best.com/~dkeith
In your mail to me bounces, try removing Xenu
Godwin's Law: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the
probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler
approaches one."
My addendum: Unless you are discussing Scientology, you will
have just lost the argument.

Ex Mudder

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>Anti-Cult wrote:
>> On Sun, 29 Dec 1996 13:19:57 +0100.
>> Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>.
>> From: Grolier Interactive Europe.
>> Wrote on the subject: Simply Scientologist:

<snip>


>
>I didn't know that being Scientologist was a crime or was dangerous for

>the security. Do you know that the group on this planet wich uses less


>alcool and drug is probably Scientologists.

Mormons and Muslims.


>
>And if Scientology is illegal to work in a nuclear power plant, who will
>be next ? Mormons ? Judes ?

Neo-Nazis, Communists...

Mormans are loyal and take jobs in the govt. because they believe in
the Govt. Not to steal anything they see.
I dunno what Judes are (isn't that a Beatles song?) but Jews are
similiar in their trustworthness to Mormons.

Ex Mudder

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:

>> Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote in article
>> <32C7B3...@club-internet.fr>...

>> > Eupraxist wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:

>> You deliberately ignored my question, so I will ask it again:
>>

>> Why did Source lie and claim that he was a "nuclear physicist" on the book
>> jacket?
>


>What do you think of being a student at one of the first study program
>of Nuclear physic in university ? Other student of that time when L. Ron
>Hubbard studied were involved in the development of nuclear bomb in
>1940's.

What do you think about the fact that Hubbard flunked out of this
course?
Check out http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~achorn/cos/hubbard.grades if you
don't want to believe me.

Ex Mudder

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

til...@xenu.com (Tilman Hausherr) wrote:

>In <32c7aaff...@193.12.69.3>,


>The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com (Anti-Cult) wrote:
>
>>May God protect us from scientologists in nuclear power plants.
>

>Yes I agree. Until today I thought that there were only three jobs in
>which scientologists usually shouldn't be allowed: cop, teacher, and
>mailman. I would add to this any "vital" job in a nuclear power plant. I
>mean, we have here people who are obviously unfit for such a job, since
>they believe the nuclear pseudo-science of a guy who did not even
>succeed in the first court.

You forgot Judges in that list.
Someone's comment about not wanting Xtian Scientists (faith
healers) working in Emergeny Rooms also somes to mind.
I doubt a Christian Scientist would become a Doctor, but
Scientologists actively recuit in that field.
So, I'd add Emergency Medical Personnel (the experten, or
Ambulencier (sp)) to that list. When I'm bleeding from gtting hit by
a car, I don't want a touch assist.
>
>But I wouldn't complain to his employer. This is more a scientology
>tactic. If his employer hasn't seen the security risk, then either
>Pierre isn't involved in vital parts, or the management of that plant is
>so clueless that the plant will experience a core meltdown sooner or
>later anyway. My only hope is that the winds will not transport the
>particles to Germany.

The probably don't know about his beliefs.

Baba ROM DOS

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

ra...@xenologics.idiscover.co.uk (Ralph Hilton) writes:

>On 30 Dec 1996 21:12:31 GMT, ba...@jones.neu.sgi.com (Baba ROM DOS)
>wrote:

>>In the event of a serious breach of reactor containment, releasing


>>radiation into the environment, should the unfortunate residents of
>>the surrounding area be given
>>
>>(a) Large doses of Niacin
>>(b) Large doses of Iodine
>>or (c) Dianetic Auditing?
>>
>>Please explain your choice.

>d) None of the above.

>They should be given very large doses of water and a book of prayers.
>This flushes out that which can be flushed out and gives them a hope
>in Hell.

Flunk!

Ralph Hilton

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

On Tue, 31 Dec 1996 00:29:47 +0100, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>
wrote:

>Scott Goehring wrote:
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>

>> In article <5a9b7v$7...@murrow.corp.sgi.com>,
>> Baba ROM DOS <ba...@jones.neu.sgi.com> wrote:
>>

>> >If you wish to bait Pierre on his communications skills, please
>> >do so in French. His English is clearly better than Hubbard's command
>> >of any of the foreign languages Hubbard claimed to speak "fluently".
>>

>> normally, i would agree. however, Scientology claims to make people
>> "more able to communicate." since Pierre elected to communicate with
>> us in English, i expect that he is fully enabled to do so, by the
>> virtues of the unsurpassed Hubbard Communication Technology.
>
>Thank you, is this a cult here or do I need a private pass ?
>Thank you for your agreement.

There are a few debased individuals here who think it is clever to
criticize your use of the English language. They aren't that bright
and you can safely ignore them.


--

Ralph Hilton

Anti-Cult

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

On Tue, 31 Dec 1996 00:03:14 GMT.
til...@xenu.com (Tilman Hausherr).
From: Xenu's Ranch.
Wrote on the subject: Re: Simply Scientologist:

>In <32c7aaff...@193.12.69.3>,
>The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com (Anti-Cult) wrote:
>
>>May God protect us from scientologists in nuclear power plants.
>
>Yes I agree. Until today I thought that there were only three jobs in
>which scientologists usually shouldn't be allowed: cop, teacher, and
>mailman. I would add to this any "vital" job in a nuclear power plant. I
>mean, we have here people who are obviously unfit for such a job, since
>they believe the nuclear pseudo-science of a guy who did not even
>succeed in the first court.
>

>But I wouldn't complain to his employer. This is more a scientology
>tactic. If his employer hasn't seen the security risk, then either
>Pierre isn't involved in vital parts, or the management of that plant is
>so clueless that the plant will experience a core meltdown sooner or
>later anyway. My only hope is that the winds will not transport the
>particles to Germany.
>

>Tilman

You are of course right. This man with his beliefs in the Hub's
radiation knowledge, is of course no more than a janitor at best. I am
pretty sure that he doesn't even work near any nuclear plant. Any
managment of any nuclear plant would have spotted this piece of junk
instantly an throwned him out in a milli second.

(Anti-Cult) http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/index.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------
Search terms: OT, Hubbard, NOTS, Secret, Xenu, Xemu.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Victimized by the Co$."Deadfiled" in at least one Org.Seen too
much,heard to much,lived too much. Security Coded hard disks
too much. Have been reading NOTS too much. Having chronic
pneumonia. As Arnold said: I'll be back.......
---------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ One drop of drops in the river of life ~
~ Has not the power to float by itself ~
~ But there's this demand on every drop: ~
~ Help keep the other ones up ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Anti-Cult

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

On Mon, 30 Dec 1996 22:57:19 +0100.

Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>.
From: Grolier Interactive Europe.
Wrote on the subject: Re: Simply Scientologist:

>Anti-Cult wrote:


>>
>> On Sun, 29 Dec 1996 13:19:57 +0100.
>> Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>.
>> From: Grolier Interactive Europe.
>> Wrote on the subject: Simply Scientologist:
>>

>> >I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
>> >nuclear power plant.
>> >


>> >Talking about Scientology or Scientologists is fun. But the best you
>> >could do is doing Scientology and that means being more ethic and
>> >efficient in life. That also mean being free from any drug or stress.
>> >That also mean being able to really help people, and I know what is
>> >help, after saving life of member of my familly who were sverely ill.
>> >

>> >And you, have you ever really helped ?
>> >
>>

>> May God protect us from scientologists in nuclear power plants. The
>> security risk when one of these mentally instable people get attacked
>> by their Body Thetans is more than we need here in Europe. Can someone
>> please inform his employeer that this security risk is mentally
>> disturbed and can be attacked by dead space aliens while doing his
>> job. Isn't working in a nuclear power plant security classed in
>> France? It sure is in Sweden.
>

>I didn't know that being Scientologist was a crime or was dangerous for
>the security. Do you know that the group on this planet wich uses less
>alcool and drug is probably Scientologists.

It's not a crime, but it surely is a security problem. If you are an
engineer in a nuclear plant, which you of course aren't, then you
would surely be a security risk. Especially if you believed the Phat
Phraud and his drug induced nuclear knowledge. The group on this
planet that uses less alcohol and drugs, are not Scientologists, it is
the absolutists.


>
>And if Scientology is illegal to work in a nuclear power plant, who will
>be next ? Mormons ? Judes ?

It has to do with knowledge my friend. If you believe in the Hub and
his nuclear physics, then you are not fit to be within a mile of a
nuclear plant. And of course you aren't either. Keep on cleaning those
floors, in that school, or whatever.

Btw: Watch out for those nasty Engrams ( or should it be Ingrams)
flying around, you could get hit by one of them. At the same time you
have to keep an eye on the nasty evil Body Thetans from Xenu's
dominion. They can really sweap you off the floor.

Control rod's on their way in. Reaction stopped. Go home.

Pierre

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

Baba ROM DOS wrote:
>
> sc...@poverty.bloomington.in.us (Scott Goehring) writes:
>
> >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> >In article <32C690...@club-internet.fr>,
> >Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>
> >>I've studied a lot about radiation and neutronic (sorry I'm not sure
> >>of the translation).
>
> >comm tech failing on you again, eh?
>
> If you wish to bait Pierre on his communications skills, please
> do so in French. His English is clearly better than Hubbard's command
> of any of the foreign languages Hubbard claimed to speak "fluently".
>
> >>All about radiation is completely true and is wise to give the point
> >>of view of the mental effect of radiation.
>
> >"All about radiation" is generally acknowledged by people with
> >intelligence to be utter claptrap.
>
> And dangerous claptrap at that.
>
> > it's certainly grossly
> >inconsistent with what we _know_ about radiation, both from military
> >experimentation and in dealing with low-, medium-, and high-level
> >contamination arising from accidents in civil operations (such as
> >Three Mile Island and Chernobyl).
>
> >>Don't mix-up civil nuclear and nuclear weapon.
>
> >it's the same sort of radiation, although nuclear weapons do create a
> >great deal more of it.
>
> >>All about radiation is a very good book and not a controversial one.
>
> >it's a utter lump of garbage; the only controversy is over why anyone
> >should pay any attention to it at all. i am dumbstruck that someone
> >who claims to be a nuclear engineer could read it without laughing out
> >loud at the idiocy of the claims made therein.
>
> Pierre:
>
> Est-ce que vous avez vraiment lu "All About Radiation" de LRH?
> En englais, ou en traduction francaise? Etes-vous sure que vous
> l'avez bien compris? Voulez-vous repondre a la question suivante?
En Français, et je pense l'avoir compris. Je l'ai lu il y a plusieurs
années.

>
> In the event of a serious breach of reactor containment, releasing
> radiation into the environment, should the unfortunate residents of
> the surrounding area be given
>
> (a) Large doses of Niacin
> (b) Large doses of Iodine
> or (c) Dianetic Auditing?
>
> Please explain your choice.

First, a large dose of Iodine, for sure, because civil reactor release
large quantities of Iode, not nuclear bomb (Should be confirmed). This
is common-sense
And Niacine in a purification rundown of course to clean-up the effects.

Dianetic auditing could be a very good help if you have received a huge
amount of radiation. It could be like an accident to your body and that
can be audited. Fortunatly, I never did it (audited somebody injuried by
radiations). But I audited people injuried, and that works. Believe me
or not.

Tilman Hausherr

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

In <32c7aaff...@193.12.69.3>,
The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com (Anti-Cult) wrote:

>May God protect us from scientologists in nuclear power plants.

Yes I agree. Until today I thought that there were only three jobs in


which scientologists usually shouldn't be allowed: cop, teacher, and
mailman. I would add to this any "vital" job in a nuclear power plant. I
mean, we have here people who are obviously unfit for such a job, since
they believe the nuclear pseudo-science of a guy who did not even
succeed in the first court.

But I wouldn't complain to his employer. This is more a scientology
tactic. If his employer hasn't seen the security risk, then either
Pierre isn't involved in vital parts, or the management of that plant is
so clueless that the plant will experience a core meltdown sooner or
later anyway. My only hope is that the winds will not transport the
particles to Germany.

Tilman


--- Tilman Hausherr [KoX, SP4]
til...@berlin.snafu.de http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/#cos

Resistance is futile. You will be enturbulated. Xenu always prevails.

Jim Bianchi

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

On Mon, 30 Dec 1996 23:01:16 +0100, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>> Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote in article
>> <32C7B3...@club-internet.fr>...
>> > Eupraxist wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>> > > >All about radiation is a very good book and not a controversial one.
>> > >
>> > > I have a degree in medical physics and All About Radiation is risible
>> > > dogshit.
>> > > If you think it is "a very good book" it can only mean that you are
>> > > scientifically ignorant.
>> > >
>> > > BTW, why did Lafayette lie and claim that he was a "nuclear physicist"
>> on
>> > > the book jacket?
>>
>> > Great for your degree, but I am engeneer and studied neutronic, so who
>> > is right ?
>>
>> Since medical physics is the study of the effects of all types of radiation
>> on bilogical systems (including humans), that means that I am right.

>>
>> You deliberately ignored my question, so I will ask it again:
>>
>> Why did Source lie and claim that he was a "nuclear physicist" on the book
>> jacket?
>
>What do you think of being a student at one of the first study program
>of Nuclear physic in university ? Other student of that time when L. Ron
>Hubbard studied were involved in the development of nuclear bomb in
>1940's.

Very interesting, yet it STILL avoids answering the question, which
I shall repeat: Why did Hubbard lie and claim he was a nuclear physicist on
the book jacket of "All About Radiation?"

For extra credit, you might want to tell the studio audience exactly
what was the name of "one of the first study programs" and what was the name
of the university in which it was held?

Are you SURE you don't work at Chernobyl?

--
ji...@sonic.net
Eclectic Garbanzo BBS, (707) 539-1279


Steve A

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

On Mon, 30 Dec 1996 13:19:15 +0100, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>
wrote:

> Eupraxist wrote:
> >
> > Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
> > >All about radiation is a very good book and not a controversial one.
> >
> > I have a degree in medical physics and All About Radiation is risible
> > dogshit.
> > If you think it is "a very good book" it can only mean that you are
> > scientifically ignorant.
> >
> > BTW, why did Lafayette lie and claim that he was a "nuclear physicist" on
> > the book jacket?
> Great for your degree, but I am engeneer and studied neutronic, so who
> is right ?

Answer the question. Why did Hubbard lie on the cover of the book?


--
Steve A, SP4, GGBC, KBM, Unsalvageable PTS/SP #12
ObDenial: I am not Arthur Stevens of Crawley.
ObURLS: Beginners: http://www.tiac.net/users/modemac/cos.html
In-depth: http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/scientology/home.html
Harassment: http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/scientology/harass/timeline-95.html
Fools, losers, and mugs: http://www.scientology.org

Child molesters! Join Scientology and grope with impunity! Why?

Donald Strawn raped a 13 year old girl, and attempted to rape
her 12 year old sister. The "Church" of Scientology in Clear-
water attempted to blackmail the girls' mother into silence.

Steve A

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

On Mon, 30 Dec 1996 13:15:06 +0100, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>
wrote:

> Tilman Hausherr wrote:
> >
> > In <32C690...@club-internet.fr>, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>


> > wrote:
> >
> > >I've studied a lot about radiation and neutronic (sorry I'm not sure of

> > >the translation). All about radiation is completely true and is wise to


> > >give the point of view of the mental effect of radiation.
> >

> > Sorry, but "All about radiation" deals not only with the "mental
> > effects" of radiation.
> Right, but this aspect is treated in that book for the first time. And
> you can see that people are scared about radiation because they don't
> know what it is, this is a weird effect of the radiations.

Crap. Nothing Hubbard wrote on radiation was any more than the half
remembered and barely understood gleanings of scraps of pop science.
He relied upon general ignorance of radiation to set himself up as
some sort of expert on the subject.

> > - radiation can be "sweatened out" ?
> Not the radiation itself but the particle who cause the radiation, yes.
> That's exactly what we do in a nuclear power plant : we wash things.

Hubbard claims that _radiation_ can be sweated out: it's one of the
functions of the Purif. Surely you are not going against Source?

> > - niacin helps to "run out" radiation ?
> Of course, have you done the purification rundown ? Have you felt and
> SEEN an old sunburn vanishing ?

Niacin causes a skin flush. It's nothing to do with sunburn, radiation
or anything other than excessive dilation of capillaries at the
surface of the skin. Furthermore, in the doses given during the Purif,
it can also cause serious liver damage.

> > - scientologists get immune from radiation ?
> Not at all, they are more resistant if they have done the purification
> rundown because they start from zero.

And would you walk into a "hot" area, happy that you were protected by
the Purif?

> > And here a good one from clear body, clear mind:


> >
> > RADIATION AND LIQUIDS (p47)
> > On the Purification, findings seem to bear out that there
> > is a factor related to radiation that produces the greatest
> > exudation of it and that it is the sweating itself.
> > Radiation is apparently water-soluble, as well as water
> > removable. According to researchers, one merely has to take
> > a hose to a building surface or a road to wash the radiation
> > off of it. This factor is well known to defense trained
> > personnel.
> >

> > >Don't mix-up civil nuclear and nuclear weapon.
> >

> > But civil and military radiation is the same.
> Yes but not the same amount. For example you will receive 10 or 100
> times the amount of radiation I've received in a year when you take the
> plane (high altitude->cosmic radiations).

Thanks to the efforts of physicists and other scientists who, rather
than sitting at Hubbard's feet listening to him jerk off, got out
there and learned what there was to learn, then added to the body of
knowledge - no Scieno has ever won a Nobel prize, or achieved any
major scientific breakthrough, yet with the claims made for the tech,
you'd think it would have happened in forty-five years.

> > >All about radiation is a very good book and not a controversial one.
> >

> > It is certainly controversial, like scientology itself.
> That's what you say, and you can say what you want.

Yup. But who do you think everybody else is believing?

> > Btw, what is your processing and training level ?
> CLASS IV Internship not completed. I won't tell you the rest because I
> don't want to be criticized about my case.

This one's been primed: he knows the "don't discuss case" rule.

Are you OT? If I quote bits of the old OTVII, wherein it deals with
placing your intention in plants and trees, will it affect your case?

> > >Instead of criticizing Scientology, have you ever tried to audit (using
> > >the Dianetics technology) someone ? Have you seen result of good
> > >application of Scientology ?
> >
> > What is your opinion on cocaine ? And have you ever tried it yourself ?
> No but I don't know millions of people happy to be involved in. And
> whatever you can say, there are people who really enjoy Scientology and
> they don't look like weird people.

The ones they send here sound like weird people. Do you know what's
*so* weird? We get Scienos here from time to time, just like you. They
try to defend the tech by asking us what good we've done, whether
we've tried auditing, etc., etc. And do you know what's so weird about
that? No matter whether they're British, American, German, French,
Danish or whatever, they all use exactly the same techniques. Like
little robots, all programmed to "handle" the SP's.

It might be a neat trick if the program worked.

> > Same question for heroine, marijuana, LST, speed, etc.
> Good question, there is a campain from the Church which is say no to
> drug. Do you have children ? If yes, you would be happy if you see
> booklet from the chuch all around aginst drug.
> >
> > Tilman
> >
> The day that we can trust each other, there will be peace ont earth.
> L. Ron Hubbard

He was a fine one to talk. The man who left a string of unpaid debts
everywhere he went. The man who stole his best friend's girlfriend and
yacht. The man who started a cult that sends poison pen letters to
people who have already committed suicide thanks to the harassment
they got from other cultists.

Hubbard? Trust? Don't make me sick.

> Maybe one day...

That could be the ARSCC motto. If the ARSCC existed.

Steve A

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

On Tue, 31 Dec 1996 00:28:19 +0100, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>
wrote:

> Dianetic auditing could be a very good help if you have received a huge
> amount of radiation. It could be like an accident to your body and that
> can be audited. Fortunatly, I never did it (audited somebody injuried by
> radiations). But I audited people injuried, and that works. Believe me
> or not.

Thanks. I'll take the "not". Or NOTs.

Steve A

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

On Sun, 29 Dec 1996 13:19:57 +0100, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>
wrote:

> I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
> nuclear power plant.

A _proper_ professional engineer? Qualified? How on earth do you
square your scientology beliefs with the rigorous science required in
the training of a properly qualified European Engineer (EurIng)? Or
are you one of these semi-skilled types who _calls_ himself an
engineer?

Because I have to say that the prospect of someone who has anything to
do with the working of a nuclear power plant believing, inter alia,
that he is infested with the souls of thousands of nuked space aliens
scares the shit right out of me.

> Talking about Scientology or Scientologists is fun. But the best you
> could do is doing Scientology and that means being more ethic and
> efficient in life. That also mean being free from any drug or stress.

Tell that to the (Scieno) pilot of the DC-8 who crashed his plane into
the Potomac, killing all but 3. He wasn't quite so "at cause", was he?

> That also mean being able to really help people, and I know what is
> help, after saving life of member of my familly who were sverely ill.
>
> And you, have you ever really helped ?

Seen it all before, old chum. Scieno trots out vague and hopelessly
unverifiable claim for benefits of tech, then insists SP's enter
pissing contest with Scieno to prove they've done more. This, despite
the fact that the only things Scientology can be relied upon to do is
to make its followers behave strangely, and make its leaders very
rich. And even that's going to come to a halt pretty soon...

Steve A

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

On Sun, 29 Dec 1996 16:36:46 +0100, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>
wrote:

> Tilman Hausherr wrote:


> >
> > In <32C661...@club-internet.fr>, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
> >
> > >I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
> > >nuclear power plant.

> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > Now you've really scared me!
> >
> > What is your professional opinion on the accuracy of "All about Radiation"?
> >
> > Tilman


>
> I've studied a lot about radiation and neutronic (sorry I'm not sure of
> the translation). All about radiation is completely true and is wise to
> give the point of view of the mental effect of radiation.
>

> Don't mix-up civil nuclear and nuclear weapon.

Oh, so just so long as you let the neutrons know that they're civil
neutrons, not military ones, that's OK? Which part of OTVII covers the
bit where you place your intentions into the neutrons, Pierre?



> All about radiation is a very good book and not a controversial one.

Controversial, no. Ludicrous, yes. Factually incorrect...absolutely.
Do you really believe that radiation is water soluble?

Steve A

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

On Mon, 30 Dec 1996 00:32:26 GMT, ra...@xenologics.idiscover.co.uk
(Ralph Hilton) wrote:

> On Sun, 29 Dec 1996 20:41:03 GMT, til...@xenu.com (Tilman Hausherr)

> wrote:
>
> >In <32C690...@club-internet.fr>, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>
> >wrote:
> >

> > RADIATION AND LIQUIDS (p47)
> > On the Purification, findings seem to bear out that there
> > is a factor related to radiation that produces the greatest
> > exudation of it and that it is the sweating itself.
> > Radiation is apparently water-soluble, as well as water
> > removable. According to researchers, one merely has to take
> > a hose to a building surface or a road to wash the radiation
> > off of it. This factor is well known to defense trained
> > personnel.
> >

> So some idiots take the piss by taking this too literally. Many of the
> products from a nuclear explosion, particularly the ones easily
> assimilated by the human body are water soluble. e.g. Strontium 90.
> (as the hydroxide).

The ISOTOPES may be, but the radiation isn't. Try telling someone with
thyroid failure due to incorporation of radioactive iodine that all
that needs to be done is to "wash" the radiation out.

Hubbard made a series of bald statements: why should _we_ be the ones
to perform the mental gymnastics necessary to twist his tortured
imaginings into something resembling reality?

Zed

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:

> We have a
>similar organization in France : ADFI. But the ADFI is still active
and
>telling lies to everybody stupid enough to read only sensational
papers.
>In the trial most of their lies vanished : for example, they said for
>years that the man killed himself because of a purification rundown.
It
>has been proved that he never started or even paid for it!

Fucking incredible. You state that the man never started the Purif as
if someone actually said otherwise. Where are you getting your
information?

Scientologists were pressuring the man into getting the money to pay
for the Purification Rundown. He tried to get the money from a
relative, who refused to give it to him. Because of this pressuring
from Church members, he jumped out of a window.

This was the allegation made in the trial. What part of this
allegation says that the man either started or paid for the
Purification Rundown?

>Oneday ADFI
>and all their lies will be stopped like the CAN in the USA, and the
>truth will be widely known. The justice in France is completly
controled
>by the government. And governement give a huge amount of money to the
>ADFI to stop small religions... If you want all the story you should
get
>a copy of the French Freedom.

Uh-huh. I think I know where you're getting your information from now.

>So tell me, how can millions of people think about L.RON HUBBARD as
>their best friend ? Do you think they are stupid ?

Perhaps a hint of the answer could be found if you answer this
question: how can a man believe that the ADFI lied about someone
starting the Purification Rundown when no such claim was made?

Just out of curiosity: do you know whether or not a verdict in the
trial has been reached yet?

Zed PGP key on Request
****PGP is obviously a good idea - look at who objects to it****
Resources for Ex-Scientologists: http://www.zeta.org.au/~hendersn/
"This program will handle everything you said you wanted handled. All
it will cost you is $2,500." I asked, "Is that ALL everything here
will cost me?" She replied in a very definitive voice, "YES, that's
all." -- conversation between Wayne Whitney and a Scn recruiter.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: cp850

iQEVAwUBMsnS8SsxIzhyTOOxAQFtPAf7BHfgCT+Q9SN29ROG656WVzAdvnsqtJUe
VyI6KYxUfj+bJckAVBtkuWhh1aIh2t/SWbfIzqfiNhZLptvDKkC7FltNo8UN8tI/
cQmlGGD8sSs1O5gtFCzm8rovE7OjPox9ko3LUUWKD6W7mh1f1pNGWH02+mnlIWT0
VQ7E6VtGqhUNxuKhnr6vaifTPfFjVliZmKeJ2usmtxWtONi9GHG4ODiYiNPbI/+I
3wC/ZWNwUKviy/UPmIe766Tmz1ELNj5AfsZWJ91aVJqVKvu3c4SozR8MjgcNqFDv
0NawqpgJmluYf4AHN6ZbNhW/iHu+AlrBK7blJtjdfiQsP9zHkd5j/g==
=nRyx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Dominion

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

ra...@xenologics.idiscover.co.uk (Ralph Hilton) wrote:

>>In the event of a serious breach of reactor containment, releasing
>>radiation into the environment, should the unfortunate residents of
>>the surrounding area be given
>>
>>(a) Large doses of Niacin
>>(b) Large doses of Iodine
>>or (c) Dianetic Auditing?
>>
>>Please explain your choice.

>d) None of the above.

>They should be given very large doses of water and a book of prayers.
>This flushes out that which can be flushed out and gives them a hope
>in Hell.


Please explain exactly WHAT the water will be "flushing" out of your
body?

And exactly HOW does it work?

I know of NO SERIOUS SCIENTIST that recomends drinking water to cure
radiation poisoning.

Dominion


Scott Goehring

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <32C7B3...@club-internet.fr>,
Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:

>Great for your degree, but I am engeneer and studied neutronic, so
>who is right ?

argument from false authority. your studies of "neutronic" do not
qualify you to render expert opinions on physiology.

unlike L. Ron Hubbard, i actually hold a degree from an accredited
institution of higher education. while my degree is not in nuclear
engineering, my father's master's degree in nuclear physics has rubbed
off on me quite a bit. so has my mother's doctorate in medicine. i
have a clue of what i'm talking about. do you?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMsltbs85mNScRcpVAQGSRQP/X71PvzPbiSv3OBP5RUCX4piV7K8TKA6p
lEy28Y7DSnpDqW1vzyLDBQLeSp9lDvf7x3LvErXjF0TM7VuSAChRcvafgx/g5BSk
2LsTugzZvaA031y0pTXW74Wwnon+OUaRTIC0WxKLhPF7vk/4PebdmlIUDNNjMSRV
MBtm+HARsxY=
=B+Iu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Scott Goehring

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <32C83B...@club-internet.fr>,
Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:

>What do you think of being a student at one of the first study
>program of Nuclear physic in university ?

quite true. L. Ron Hubbard has the signal honor of being one of the
first students to fail nuclear physics.

>Other student of that time when L. Ron Hubbard studied were involved
>in the development of nuclear bomb in 1940's.

hm. i was in a calculus class with a person who is now a professor of
mathematics at Oklahoma State University. by your lights, i should
therefore be qualified to profess mathematics?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMsluWs85mNScRcpVAQE+HAP8CdlJ0GHF3jHTQNgOpGFNCJwnkx5FxSjf
DjeyA3wUf67/wBmrWy6daZ/A7OmfkP47GnhQ5Nj/0f5dh5Aite7n8kDd9fqDzshx
9cjrynTAWm8UjfBYoJNmUyK1cKWakUB3FEa1nIx8tGDFxVg10XLmkUIjzpBVjgqz
BeNw+Lxvvds=
=IsKE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

starshadow

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:

>I'm Scientologist for more than 8 years and I'm also Ingeneer in a
>nuclear power plant.

>Talking about Scientology or Scientologists is fun. But the best you


>could do is doing Scientology and that means being more ethic and
>efficient in life. That also mean being free from any drug or stress.

>That also mean being able to really help people, and I know what is
>help, after saving life of member of my familly who were sverely ill.

>And you, have you ever really helped ?

My father had a framed picture for years, showed a Sad Sack type
character saying "Six munce ago I cudn't even spell 'Engineer' and
now, by golly, I are one!"
I think we found the guy who posed for that picture.

Bright Blessings,
Starshadow star...@aa.net

"Feminism: the radical notion that women are people, too."


Steve A

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

On Mon, 30 Dec 1996 23:01:16 +0100, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>
wrote:

> > Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote in article

> > Why did Source lie and claim that he was a "nuclear physicist" on the book
> > jacket?
>

> What do you think of being a student at one of the first study program

> of Nuclear physic in university ? Other student of that time when L. Ron


> Hubbard studied were involved in the development of nuclear bomb in
> 1940's.

Answer the question. Why did Hubbard lie?

Martin Hunt

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

In article <5a9b9g$q...@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu>,

sc...@poverty.bloomington.in.us (Scott Goehring) wrote:
}-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
}
}In article <32C75E...@sk.sympatico.ca>,
}crystal kozar <mc...@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote:
}
}>Mike you are too deep...he he...Actually 4+4 is 8 and that is a fact,
}>which has nothing to do with truth. Truth is in the minds eye, but
}>fact is undisputable.
}
}that's debatable. things like 4+4=8 are true becuase they follow from
}definitions that we agree to accept as true, without knowing for
}certain that there are true. for all you know, it's possible to
}construct a meaningful system of mathematics where 4+4=6.

In any case, 4+4=8 is only true in an abstract sense. In reality,
no two things are identical. 4 apples + 4 apples = 8 apples is only approximately true, because all the apples are different. I see
that this is a fact, so much as a general rule. Exactly 1 *what*
plus 1 *what* equals 2?

And no, I have no idea what this has to do with scn, unless you
know that he said that A=A=A thinking was a bad thing, an idea he
stole from Korzybski's _General Semantics_.

--
$cientologists on the lam: Suzanne Schnuremberger, Ildiko Cannovas
and Laura Arrunada, wanted for questioning concerning the mysterious
death of Lisa McPherson in Clearwater, FLA.


Martin Hunt

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

In article <32C850...@club-internet.fr>,
Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:

}Scott Goehring wrote:
}>
}> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
}>
}> In article <5a9b7v$7...@murrow.corp.sgi.com>,
}> Baba ROM DOS <ba...@jones.neu.sgi.com> wrote:
}>
}> >If you wish to bait Pierre on his communications skills, please
}> >do so in French. His English is clearly better than Hubbard's command
}> >of any of the foreign languages Hubbard claimed to speak "fluently".
}>
}> normally, i would agree. however, Scientology claims to make people
}> "more able to communicate." since Pierre elected to communicate with
}> us in English, i expect that he is fully enabled to do so, by the
}> virtues of the unsurpassed Hubbard Communication Technology.
}
}Thank you, is this a cult here or do I need a private pass ?
}Thank you for your agreement.

Pierre, you're Out Tech. You're meant to mock-up the next tone level
*above* the SPs in order to bring them Up Tone and to an Awareness
of Scientology. The critics are nattering away at 1.1, so you should be
at Unexpressed Resentment, not at 1.1 yourself. All you're doing is
bring those at Anxiety up to Covert Hostility! Flunk! You're creating
a problem!

Steve A

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

On Mon, 30 Dec 1996 22:57:19 +0100, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>
wrote:

> Anti-Cult wrote:
> > May God protect us from scientologists in nuclear power plants. The
> > security risk when one of these mentally instable people get attacked
> > by their Body Thetans is more than we need here in Europe. Can someone
> > please inform his employeer that this security risk is mentally
> > disturbed and can be attacked by dead space aliens while doing his
> > job. Isn't working in a nuclear power plant security classed in
> > France? It sure is in Sweden.
>
> I didn't know that being Scientologist was a crime or was dangerous for
> the security. Do you know that the group on this planet wich uses less
> alcool and drug is probably Scientologists.

I agree that the risk of alcohol and drug abuse is a serious one,
whatever the workplace.

But what gives *me* the creeps is the thought of followers of a belief
system which, apart from the prosaic rubbish like Hubbard's claim that
radiation is water-soluble, teaches its followers that they can have
control over MEST, and that they can influence physical happenings
around them. What happens when some OT working in a nuclear power
plant, driving a train or flying a plane decides that he's going to
use postulates instead of the more conventional and proven methods of
dealing with incidents? Worse still, what are the effects on people's
judgement making abilities of a belief that they can, if they wish,
simply postulate into existence a particular set of circumstances? Is
it possible, for example, that a Scientologist might believe that he
is capable of resolving a dangerous situation by exerting his gnarly
OT powers, and that he might therefore be less strongly motivated
towards avoiding the situation arising in the first place? Is it
possible that a Scientologist flying a plane might consider that his
powers are such that even if the plane's de-icing equipment isn't
working properly, he will be capable of making sure it takes off OK?

> And if Scientology is illegal to work in a nuclear power plant, who will
> be next ? Mormons ? Judes ?

If people are banned from working in a particular environment *purely*
because of their private avocations, I think it will be a terrible
thing.

However, where people's beliefs are likely to have an effect on the
way that they do their jobs, I think that it is not so unreasonable.
If, for example, a follower of a religion that believed that the
release of nuclear material into the environment were a means of
summoning their deity, the Great Pamplemousse, were to get a job in a
nuclear power plant, I'd be concerned that he might consider a core
meltdown to be something desirable, to be achieved at all costs. And,
let's face it, many of Scientology's beliefs are no less far-fetched.

Steve A

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

On Tue, 31 Dec 1996 04:27:42 GMT, dke...@xenu.best.com (Ex Mudder)
wrote:

> Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
> >Anti-Cult wrote:

> >> On Sun, 29 Dec 1996 13:19:57 +0100.
> >> Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>.
> >> From: Grolier Interactive Europe.
> >> Wrote on the subject: Simply Scientologist:
>

> <snip>


> >
> >I didn't know that being Scientologist was a crime or was dangerous for
> >the security. Do you know that the group on this planet wich uses less
> >alcool and drug is probably Scientologists.
>

> Mormons and Muslims.


> >
> >And if Scientology is illegal to work in a nuclear power plant, who will
> >be next ? Mormons ? Judes ?
>

> Neo-Nazis, Communists...
>
> Mormans are loyal and take jobs in the govt. because they believe in
> the Govt. Not to steal anything they see.
> I dunno what Judes are (isn't that a Beatles song?) but Jews are
> similiar in their trustworthness to Mormons.

"Judes" are, as you guessed, "Jews", and this is another transparent
attempt by another Scieno to try and push people's Holocaust buttons.

Pierre - it is the generally held view amongst critics on this
newsgroup that Scientology's position in society *does* have parallels
in 1930's Germany.

Parallels to the activities of the National Socialist party at that
time.

Oregon Ghost

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

In article <32c8524...@news.snafu.de>, til...@xenu.com says...
>
>In <32c7aaff...@193.12.69.3>,

>The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com (Anti-Cult) wrote:
>
>>May God protect us from scientologists in nuclear power plants.
>
>Yes I agree. Until today I thought that there were only three jobs in
>which scientologists usually shouldn't be allowed: cop, teacher, and
>mailman. I would add to this any "vital" job in a nuclear power plant.

How about IRS agent, Judge, or Notary Public ;)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^

"I swear this statement is true an is notarized by a person with the proper
hat to legalize it."

--
KNIGHTS OF XENU INTERGALACTIC BIKER CLUB
"Touch the bikes and I'll stuff you in a Volcano, worthless Thetan."


Oregon Ghost

unread,
Dec 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM12/31/96
to

>Michael 'Mike' Gormez wrote:
>>
>> Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>>
>> > What is true is what is true for you.
>>
>> 4 + 4 = 6 That is true for me thus it must be the truth. Are you saying
>> that?
>>
>> Mike,

"What I said was true, from a certain perspective, Luke."
-Obi Wan Kenobi

I'm sure we have nothing to fear... if a meltdown occurs, Pierre will use
his OT powers to contain the blast and channel the radiation only into the
homes of SPs! (Hey wait.. didn't the Country of FRANCE just convict some
scientologists? Doesn't that make all of France SP???? QUICK CALL THE
FRENCH GOV.....)

>>>>>>***********BOOOOOOMMMMMM***********<<<<<<<
**WOOOSH!*** (the sound of french citizens becoming body thetans)

um... nevermind...

Enturbulated

unread,
Jan 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM1/1/97
to

In <5aaqvg$433$1...@news.hal-pc.org>, co...@brokersys.com (Dominion) writes:
>ra...@xenologics.idiscover.co.uk (Ralph Hilton) wrote:
>

>>They should be given very large doses of water and a book of prayers.
>>This flushes out that which can be flushed out and gives them a hope
>>in Hell.
>
>
>Please explain exactly WHAT the water will be "flushing" out of your
>body?
>
>And exactly HOW does it work?
>
>I know of NO SERIOUS SCIENTIST that recomends drinking water to cure
>radiation poisoning.

Did Hubbard not claim that radiation was water solluble ?

Indeed, no serious scientist.

Regards

Pim


---Annoy a fool, ask him to back up his beliefs with facts---
"An enemy may be deprived of property, lied to, tricked, sued
or destroyed by any means" L Ron Hubbard--Fair Game Policy,


Bev

unread,
Jan 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM1/1/97
to

Alvin Brattli wrote:
>
> mar...@islandnet.com (Martin Hunt) sez [to Pierre]:
>
> > "Space, then, is not an arbitrary and absolute but is creatable
> > or uncreatable by a being" - page 10.
>
> How does a being, according to Hubbard, "create or uncreate space"?

In their mind :-) This is where all of Hubbards realities existed.
He was a sheer genius in being able to put his imaginations in such
a way that they have been accepted to the point of implantation into
the minds of others as realities.

> > "Time is the comotion of particles" - page 16.
> >
> > Do I need to go on? Hubbard continues with some 100 pages of this
> > bullshit, accompanied with numerous neophytic drawings and diagrams,
> > amply displaying his profound ignorance of the whole subject of
> > physics.
>
> Noo, please stop! This is torture!

Into the Mouth of Madness! What becomes true to you, BECOMES true
to you. Make your own demons, destroy your own demons. Make your own
demons, destroy your own demons. Make your own demons, destroy your
own demons. Make your own demons . . . . .

Beverly

Ex Mudder

unread,
Jan 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM1/1/97
to

ra...@xenologics.idiscover.co.uk (Ralph Hilton) wrote:
>On 30 Dec 1996 21:12:31 GMT, ba...@jones.neu.sgi.com (Baba ROM DOS)

>wrote:
>>sc...@poverty.bloomington.in.us (Scott Goehring) writes:
>>>In article <32C690...@club-internet.fr>,
>>>Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
<snip>

>>In the event of a serious breach of reactor containment, releasing
>>radiation into the environment, should the unfortunate residents of
>>the surrounding area be given
>>
>>(a) Large doses of Niacin
>>(b) Large doses of Iodine
>>or (c) Dianetic Auditing?
>>
>>Please explain your choice.
>
>d) None of the above.
>
>They should be given very large doses of water and a book of prayers.
>This flushes out that which can be flushed out and gives them a hope
>in Hell.
>
>Ralph Hilton

Ye gods, people... its a joke.
A rather good one, actually.

And the third priest said, "I pissed in the holy water"


If your mail to me bounces, it may be because Xenu was in it
Ex Mudder's pages: http://www.best.com/~dkeith
The Internet must be a good idea - look who objects to it!

Tilman Hausherr

unread,
Jan 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM1/1/97
to

In <32ce4e15....@192.168.2.1>,
ste...@castlsys.demon.co.uk.no.spam.thanx (Steve A) wrote:

>around them. What happens when some OT working in a nuclear power
>plant, driving a train or flying a plane decides that he's going to
>use postulates instead of the more conventional and proven methods of
>dealing with incidents? Worse still, what are the effects on people's
>judgement making abilities of a belief that they can, if they wish,
>simply postulate into existence a particular set of circumstances? Is
>it possible, for example, that a Scientologist might believe that he
>is capable of resolving a dangerous situation by exerting his gnarly
>OT powers, and that he might therefore be less strongly motivated
>towards avoiding the situation arising in the first place? Is it
>possible that a Scientologist flying a plane might consider that his
>powers are such that even if the plane's de-icing equipment isn't
>working properly, he will be capable of making sure it takes off OK?

Well, to be fair, it is not proven that Wheaton used postulates or OT
powers...

===
Pettit: That doesn't seem right, does it? Ah, that's not right. Well...

Wheaton: Yes it is, there's eighty.

Petit: Naw, I don't think that's right. Ah, maybe it is.

Wheaton: Hundred and twenty.

Pettit: I don't know.

Wheaton: Vee one. Easy. Vee two . . . Forward, forward! Easy! We
only want five hundred. Come on, forward. Forward. Just barely climb!

Pettit: Larry, we're going down. Larry.

Wheaton: I know it.

The last sound is that of the crash.


Baba ROM DOS

unread,
Jan 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM1/1/97
to

hend...@zeta.org.au (Zed) writes:

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

>Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:

>> We have a
>> similar organization in France : ADFI. But the ADFI is still active
>> and telling lies to everybody stupid enough to read only sensational
>> papers.
>>In the trial most of their lies vanished : for example, they said for
>>years that the man killed himself because of a purification rundown.
>>It has been proved that he never started or even paid for it!

>Fucking incredible. You state that the man never started the Purif as
>if someone actually said otherwise. Where are you getting your
>information?

Actually, some forensic evidence was given in the trial that Vic
*had* already started the purif, based post-mortem blood analysis.
It was speculated, but not proven, that this may have contributed
to the suicide.

>Scientologists were pressuring the man into getting the money to pay
>for the Purification Rundown. He tried to get the money from a
>relative, who refused to give it to him. Because of this pressuring
>from Church members, he jumped out of a window.

>This was the allegation made in the trial. What part of this
>allegation says that the man either started or paid for the
>Purification Rundown?

The following is a translation of a local newspaper report on
the trial that I originally posted back in October:

The drama, according to Nelly Vic (the widow ndlr), unfolded on
March 23, when Jean-Jacques Mazier (President of Co$ Lyon) accompanied
her husband to convince her to take out a loan of 30,000 francs that would
have allowed Patrice to undergo a purification treatment.
"I refused, it was too much", the young woman said.

"I didn't come to convince her to take out the loan, but to explain
to her, at her husband's request, what the program was about.
Mrs Vic was not reticent, she seemed to feel unconcerned", retorted
the man of the "Church". "That afternoon, Mr. Vic came back to
the center determined to take the treatment. We therefore agreed
to make an appointment at a bank where I had already sent some
other members."

"That night", asserted Mrs Vic, "Patrice came home very excited.
He asked for my pay slips to take out a loan. I refused. I didn't
sleep that night, having pain in my legs. Then, at 5AM..."

Around 5AM, Patrice Vic threw himself into space. According to his wife,
corroborated by experts, the desperate man had undoubtedly already begun
the purification treatment, or at least taken the megadoses of
vitamins and amphetamine-type stimulants.

>Just out of curiosity: do you know whether or not a verdict in the
>trial has been reached yet?

The verdict is on the Web! http://www.imaginet.fr/~jensting/lyon.htm

Steve A

unread,
Jan 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM1/1/97
to

On Wed, 01 Jan 1997 06:15:08 GMT, dave.h...@paonline.com (Dave
Hultberg) wrote:

> Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>
>
> >First, a large dose of Iodine, for sure, because civil reactor release
> >large quantities of Iode, not nuclear bomb (Should be confirmed). This
> >is common-sense
> >And Niacine in a purification rundown of course to clean-up the effects.


> >
> >Dianetic auditing could be a very good help if you have received a huge
> >amount of radiation. It could be like an accident to your body and that
> >can be audited. Fortunatly, I never did it (audited somebody injuried by
> >radiations). But I audited people injuried, and that works. Believe me
> >or not.
>

> I think we need to get down to specific types of radiation exposure,
> before we determine treatments. Pierre, what I would like to know is
> how you would you as a Scientologist chose to treat the following types
> of exposure:

Just wanted to say how welcome it is to have a *real* expert on the
subject here.

Y'know, this happens to Scienos who post here so often, you'd think
that they would have realised that there was no mileage in trying out
these tired old claims of Hubbard's. Best thing Scientology could do,
in fact: ditch Hubbard, overboard Miscavige and play the save-the-
world thing for all they've got.

Steve A

unread,
Jan 1, 1997, 3:00:00 AM1/1/97
to

On Tue, 31 Dec 1996 00:38:50 +0100, Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr>
wrote:

> Bev wrote:
> > Don't worry about that, if it blows up, just thrown some water on the
> > area and all the radiation will go away. :-) Sigh, would that it were
> > that simple!!
>
> Like you Beverly

And now we see the REAL Scientology coming out. Schoolyard insults
larded with a liberal dose of covert hostility.

I really hope they don't give you anything responsible to do in that
nuclear power plant - France is just a bit too close to me for
comfort.

Sassie10

unread,
Jan 2, 1997, 3:00:00 AM1/2/97
to

On Tues, 31 Dec 1996 00:31:49 GMT, ji...@bolt.sonic.net (Jim Bianchi)
wrote to
>Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> who had written to:
>> > Eupraxist who wrote:

>> > >
>> > > Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:
>> > > >All about radiation is a very good book and not a controversial
one.

<snip>

> Very interesting, yet it STILL avoids answering the question,
which
>I shall repeat: Why did Hubbard lie and claim he was a nuclear physicist
on
>the book jacket of "All About Radiation?"

He didn't. He didn't write the book cover.

>--
>ji...@sonic.net
>Eclectic Garbanzo BBS, (707) 539-1279
>

David Gerard

unread,
Jan 2, 1997, 3:00:00 AM1/2/97
to

On 30 Dec 1996 15:51:18 +0100, Alvin Brattli <lr...@xenu.com.spambot_trap> wrote:
:Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> writes:

:> So tell me, how can millions of people think about L.RON HUBBARD as


:> their best friend ? Do you think they are stupid ?

:Billions of flies cannot be wrong! Eat shit!

ROFL!

--
http://www.suburbia.net/~fun/scn -- email me if it doesn't work for you
http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~gerard/ (European mirror)
mailto: f...@suburbia.net f...@tertius.net.au

David Gerard

unread,
Jan 2, 1997, 3:00:00 AM1/2/97
to

On Tue, 31 Dec 1996 02:40:10 GMT, Anti-Cult <The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com> wrote:

:It has to do with knowledge my friend. If you believe in the Hub and
:his nuclear physics, then you are not fit to be within a mile of a
:nuclear plant. And of course you aren't either. Keep on cleaning those
:floors, in that school, or whatever.

I do believe you've hit the nail in the head. This guy hasn't gotten
closer to a nuclear power plant than watching The Simpsons.

Martin Hunt

unread,
Jan 2, 1997, 3:00:00 AM1/2/97
to

In article <32cb5f11...@news.idiscover.co.uk>,

ra...@xenologics.idiscover.co.uk (Ralph Hilton) wrote:
}On 30 Dec 1996 21:12:31 GMT, ba...@jones.neu.sgi.com (Baba ROM DOS)
}wrote:
}
}>In the event of a serious breach of reactor containment, releasing
}>radiation into the environment, should the unfortunate residents of
}>the surrounding area be given
}>
}>(a) Large doses of Niacin
}>(b) Large doses of Iodine
}>or (c) Dianetic Auditing?
}>
}>Please explain your choice.
}
}d) None of the above.

Bzzt!

}They should be given very large doses of water and a book of prayers.
}This flushes out that which can be flushed out and gives them a hope
}in Hell.

Flunk! Thanks for playing. An accurate parroting of Hubbardspew, however.

From page 47 of Hubbard's _Clear Body, Clear Mind_, (c) 1990:

"Radiation and Liquids"

"On the Purification program, findings seem to bear out that there is


a factor related to radiation that produces the greatest exudation of

it and that is sweating itself.

"Radiation is apparently enormously water-soluble [sic!] as well as water


removable. According to researchers, one merely has to take a hose

to a building surface or a road to wash the radiation off of [sic] it.


This factor is well known to defense trained personnel.

"So where one is doing the Purification program, on should be very careful
to ensure that actual sweating occurs and in volume. A sufficient intake
of water is therefore quite vital when doing the program.

"This as a side effect, however, of washing a lot of minerals out of
the system [sic!] and perhaps vitamins, as well. Thus the intake of
minerals and vitamins during the program is also a necessity."

***

It's not merely water soluble, but enormously so! Radiation can be
sweated out! Radiation, not particulate matter mind you, but actual
*radiation* can be washed off with a hose! And to top it off, water,
instead of being a primary *source* of minerals, can wash them out
of the body!

Oh, unless anyone wants to claim that Hubbard's statements were made
a long time ago, based on an earlier less developed science, please
note the copyright and publication date above; the cult still supports
this utter bullshit without correction or footnote.

Further, unless anyone is tempted to say that we should take this
literally, let me remind you this book is sub-titled "The Effective
Purification Program", Hubbard refers to faceless researchers in the
quote above, and on page 236 launches into a section on "scientific
testing" complete with graphs and cites referring to "an extensive
study by researchers from Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York
City" (which has no bearing on the Purif, incidentally, but just
mentions a contamination incident, AFAIK), and the whole tone of the
book is one of scientific delivery. There is a disclaimer in the
front, but I'm certain that is there completely against Hubbard's
wishes and both scn's desires and beliefs, being a legalistic
requirement to escape possible prosecution for medical malpractice
and fraud. I did the purif, and I was approved to go on it by
a doctor who was in league with scientology; at no time was I told
that it was quackery or fraud. It was offered up and presented as
"science", science that has been proved by "research studies" and
was medically sound. IMO, this is nothing but medical fraud, and
it should be illegal.

Martin Hunt

unread,
Jan 2, 1997, 3:00:00 AM1/2/97
to

In article <nrhvi9k...@geronimo.uit.no>,
Alvin Brattli <lr...@xenu.com.remove_this_spambot_trap> wrote:
}
}In the material Tilman cited here, Hubbard claimed that "Radiation is
}apparently water-soluble". Let's get one thing straight here before
}we continue: *Radiation* (in the form of alpha, beta, and gamma rays)
}has never been, is not, and can never be, water-soluble. The
}radioactive elements, however, can be. (Do we see traces of
}misunderstood words from the very hand of L. Ron Hubbard[tm] himself
}here?). So what Hubbard apparently is talking about, is that you can
}use a hose to wash away radioactive elements. You do that with almost
}any other type of dirt, too. Hardly any startling discovery...

"Soluble", as I understood it, meant that a substance was capable of
being disolved, water soluble meant that the sustance would disolve
into water from its particulate form. Radioactive particles, for the
most part, are not water soluble een in this sense, never mind the
absurd notion that radiation per se could disolve in water, which
is such a stupid idea that it's not even worth debating. Sugar is
water soluble; I imagine radioactive iodine is, but certainly the
metals are not. Washing particles off is one thing, disolving them
in water is another; Hubbard was too scientifically ignorant to make
even this distinction.

David Gerard

unread,
Jan 2, 1997, 3:00:00 AM1/2/97
to

On 31 Dec 1996 19:53:56 GMT, Scott Goehring <sc...@poverty.bloomington.in.us> wrote:
:In article <32C83B...@club-internet.fr>,
:Pierre <pie...@club-internet.fr> wrote:

:>What do you think of being a student at one of the first study


:>program of Nuclear physic in university ?

:quite true. L. Ron Hubbard has the signal honor of being one of the


:first students to fail nuclear physics.

No, no, you don't understand. LRH went back and altered the relevant
academic files. No, wait, it was the IRS who did that. It was all
part of the government attempt to discredit him that the noble fighters
of the Guardian Office succeeded in heading off, which is why Scn is
tax-exempt in the US.

I don't really see how you can deny all this. Do you have some problem
accepting it? Some things you've done that won't let you accept it?


:>Other student of that time when L. Ron Hubbard studied were involved


:>in the development of nuclear bomb in 1940's.

:hm. i was in a calculus class with a person who is now a professor of


:mathematics at Oklahoma State University. by your lights, i should
:therefore be qualified to profess mathematics?

You are evading the question.

Steve A

unread,
Jan 2, 1997, 3:00:00 AM1/2/97
to

On Wed, 01 Jan 1997 16:07:48 GMT, til...@xenu.com (Tilman Hausherr)
wrote:

> In <32ce4e15....@192.168.2.1>,
> ste...@castlsys.demon.co.uk.no.spam.thanx (Steve A) wrote:
>
> >towards avoiding the situation arising in the first place? Is it
> >possible that a Scientologist flying a plane might consider that his
> >powers are such that even if the plane's de-icing equipment isn't
> >working properly, he will be capable of making sure it takes off OK?
>
> Well, to be fair, it is not proven that Wheaton used postulates or OT
> powers...

My concern was more the fact that, with knowledge of one's alleged
powers over MEST at the back of one's mind, one might feel inclined to
be slightly less careful. I'd say that _that_ is reflected in the
complete disregard Wheaton had for his copilot's apparent concern.

But before our pet Scientologists start dogpiling in on me, accusing
me of blaming the crash on the fact that Wheaton was a Scieno, let me
make it clear that I was using his accident as a current example of a
situation where Scientology beliefs _could_ potentially cause
problems. If the no doubt through investigations by the NTSB into
Wheaton's crash didn't yield such a connection, then _I_ am most
certainly unqualified to suggest that one exists.

Dominion

unread,
Jan 2, 1997, 3:00:00 AM1/2/97
to

ent...@eskimo.com (Enturbulated) wrote:

>In <5aaqvg$433$1...@news.hal-pc.org>, co...@brokersys.com (Dominion) writes:
>>ra...@xenologics.idiscover.co.uk (Ralph Hilton) wrote:
>>

>>>They should be given very large doses of water and a book of prayers.
>>>This flushes out that which can be flushed out and gives them a hope
>>>in Hell.
>>
>>

>>Please explain exactly WHAT the water will be "flushing" out of your
>>body?
>>
>>And exactly HOW does it work?
>>
>>I know of NO SERIOUS SCIENTIST that recomends drinking water to cure
>>radiation poisoning.

>Did Hubbard not claim that radiation was water solluble ?

>Indeed, no serious scientist.

>Regards

>Pim

I think that what is being confused here (on the scieno's part) is the
difference between the EFFECTS of contact with radioactive particles,
and the contact of the particles themselves.

Yes, you can wash radioactive particles from the body with water.
Howver (and this is the kicker) the washing will do NOTHING for the
effects of the exposure.

All the water in the oceans would not do a thing to repair the damage
done to cells that come in contact with high speed radioactive
particles. No amount of sweat will repair damaged cells.

Whereas it is not so much for me to believe Ralph does not have a clue
(after all, he does not claim any special knowledge of particle
physics) I find it completely dumbfounding that Pierre does not seem
to know the difference. This is one of the reasons I don't believe he
has the credentals he is claiming for himself.

Dominion

Dominion

unread,
Jan 2, 1997, 3:00:00 AM1/2/97
to

mar...@islandnet.com (Martin Hunt) wrote:

>In article <nrhvi9k...@geronimo.uit.no>,
>Alvin Brattli <lr...@xenu.com.remove_this_spambot_trap> wrote:
>}
>}In the material Tilman cited here, Hubbard claimed that "Radiation is
>}apparently water-soluble". Let's get one thing straight here before
>}we continue: *Radiation* (in the form of alpha, beta, and gamma rays)
>}has never been, is not, and can never be, water-soluble. The
>}radioactive elements, however, can be. (Do we see traces of
>}misunderstood words from the very hand of L. Ron Hubbard[tm] himself
>}here?). So what Hubbard apparently is talking about, is that you can
>}use a hose to wash away radioactive elements. You do that with almost
>}any other type of dirt, too. Hardly any startling discovery...

>"Soluble", as I understood it, meant that a substance was capable of
>being disolved, water soluble meant that the sustance would disolve
>into water from its particulate form. Radioactive particles, for the
>most part, are not water soluble een in this sense, never mind the
>absurd notion that radiation per se could disolve in water, which
>is such a stupid idea that it's not even worth debating. Sugar is
>water soluble; I imagine radioactive iodine is, but certainly the
>metals are not. Washing particles off is one thing, disolving them
>in water is another; Hubbard was too scientifically ignorant to make
>even this distinction.

Excellent point!

We read that radiation is water soluble, and bring it up. Pierre
responds by saying, "ahh, you can wash off radiation" and we are so
busy pointing out how silly that is, that we completely miss the point
that even so, the ability to wash away a substance does not mean it is
water soluble, which is really what Hubbard claimed.

Way to go Martin! Keep on keeping us on our toes!

Dominion

It is loading more messages.
0 new messages