Calling Gerry Armstrong
April Morning
from past wounds. A few kind words from Gerry would help. He is not responding
to emails so the addresses are no longer active or he is choosing to ignore.
She is not angry with Gerry, just concerned about him. Closure is good. Does
anyone have a valid email address for Gerry?
ptsc
I'm afraid Gerry Armstrong is a cad and a bounder who can not be
relied on for behavior befitting a decent human being.
Stacy.Brooks-Rinder
Tom Klemesrud
I'm sick of your disgusting contempt for people. Go back into
the hole.
roger gonnet
"ptsc" <pt...@nowhere.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
gp885v4mbdp4dl5tb...@4ax.com...
Well, I know that many US people hate me because I'm criticizing your
president and some ways of life, but listen, PTSC: you're hatable
regarding what you say about Gerry.
He's been much more efficient against the crime cult than you'll ever
be. You don't have the charism, and you don't say the truth.
roger
roger
ptsc
wrote:
>Well, I know that many US people hate me because I'm criticizing your
>president and some ways of life, but listen, PTSC: you're hatable
>regarding what you say about Gerry.
Fuck you. Put up a hate page on me, as Gerry has done, and you'll
hear of it too. I don't hear you complaining about Gerry's kooky nutty
page lying about people being OSA, either.
>He's been much more efficient against the crime cult than you'll ever
>be. You don't have the charism, and you don't say the truth.
Gerry lies outright when he puts me on a page with a flashing "OSA"
on it, accusing me of being OSA, but not even having the minimal balls
necessary to admit that's what he is doing. Instead he pretends that
having a flashing "OSA" on his hate page is somehow entirely meaningless,
something I don't find very believable. In fact, he's a fucking liar.
Until you have something to say about Gerry's brazen lies about
me, I do not give a flying fuck what you think, you ass-kissing Frog
fuckhead. If you want to say anything I've said about that two-faced
slimy little weasel is untrue, pick it out and argue it.
I also don't dump women and then mock them over the
suicide of their husband, as that dirty fucker Gerry Armstrong has done.
No decent person would treat Bev as Gerry treated her. That was
some genuinely low-class shitty behavior, the behavior of a scoundrel
and a coward. No man with any self-respect would trick a lover into
destroying his email to her, meanwhile keeping her own email to him
and using it as a blackmail threat against her. That's truly dickless.
I suppose that kind of behavior is considered okay in France, but here
it is not popular.
Gerry is, to repeat, a cad and a bounder who can not be relied on for
anything worthy of a man. I bet his former "helpmeet" Lorien Phippeny has some
stories to tell, too, should it ever come to that.
Shall we talk some more about Mr. Armstrong, then and his various
attributes, or leave it at that?
arnie lerma - www.lermanet.com
There must be "a place for you" at the new patricia greenway
LMT....
Ferengi + Borg = Scientology
I'd prefer to die speaking my mind than live fearing to speak.
The only thing that always works in scientology are its lawyers
The internet is the liberty tree of the new millennium
Secrets are the mortar binding lies as bricks together into prisons for the mind
http://www.lermanet.com - mentioned 4 January 2000 in
The Washington Post's - 'Reliable Source' column re "Scientologist with no HEAD"
Warrior
>
>I also don't dump women and then mock them over the suicide of their
>husband, as that dirty fucker Gerry Armstrong has done.
Gerry in fact did not mock Beverly over the suicide of her husband.
His words regarding the heads of the hydra in fact referred to the
corporate octopus known as Scientology. Gerry explained this back
on April 11, 2002 in his post "Re: CLamelon Challenge No. 3 (or is
that 4?)".
Warrior - Sunshine disinfects
http://warrior.xenu.ca
ptsc
While I already know you will mindlessly support anything Gerry says
or does, Bev happens to disagree with you vehemently on that subject.
'nuff said on that. It was pathetic and despicable. Your support of it,
however, is merely pathetic and stupid.
I will also cite your completely brainlessly going along with the dipshit
"OSA" page as indicative of the way you will without the slightest bit
of self-awareness sign off on literally anything, no matter how stupid or
foolish it is, as long as it's signed "Gerry Armstrong." Hip hip hooray!
Warrior
>>>
>>>I also don't dump women and then mock them over the suicide of their
>>>husband, as that dirty fucker Gerry Armstrong has done.
>On 20 Feb 2003 10:06:43 -0800, Warrior <war...@xenu.ca> wrote:
>>
>>Gerry in fact did not mock Beverly over the suicide of her husband.
>>His words regarding the heads of the hydra in fact referred to the
>>corporate octopus known as Scientology. Gerry explained this back
>>on April 11, 2002 in his post "Re: CLamelon Challenge No. 3 (or is
>>that 4?)".
In article <478a5vgsukgkf3ad2...@4ax.com>, ptsc says...
>
>While I already know you will mindlessly support anything Gerry says
>or does,
You know nothing of the sort. If you actually believe that I mindlessly
support anything Gerry says or does, you are not knowledgeable of many
facts and are therefore uninformed.
>Bev happens to disagree with you vehemently on that subject.
>
>http://tinyurl.com/6592
I am quite aware that Beverly disagrees, and it is my position that she
is in error over her interpretation of Gerry's remarks; Gerry's remarks
had nothing to do with her husband.
>'nuff said on that. It was pathetic and despicable. Your support of it,
>however, is merely pathetic and stupid.
I often stand up for the truth as I see it. The fact that you think I am
"pathetic and stupid" shows that you are an emotional person who will post
your uninformed opinion along with an ad hominem. The fact is, if Gerry had
actually been guilty of the thing he has been accused of, I would have been
one of the first to voice my disgust. My position is that a rational person
can see Gerry's response for what it is -- an honest statement that he was
referring to the hydra heads of the Scientology conglomerate. Additionally,
to take Gerry's comments any other way is quite illogical, irrational and
not foundationed in facts.
Michael Haggerty
religion and I won't criticize a perons's religion. I am shocked by some of the
tactics employed however, but I suppose that every religion has it's extremists
("The militant wing of the Salvation Army" Mike Meyers in Austin Powers :-)
This is not my fight.
I am just trying to help Lorien so I appreciate the private emails with
suggestions.
Peace,
April
In article <575016bf.03021...@posting.google.com>,
StacyBro...@hotmail.com says...
ptsc
Re Bev's post at http://tinyurl.com/6592 taking Gerry Armstrong to
task for a number of things.
>>'nuff said on that. It was pathetic and despicable. Your support of it,
>>however, is merely pathetic and stupid.
>I often stand up for the truth as I see it. The fact that you think I am
>"pathetic and stupid" shows that you are an emotional person who will post
>your uninformed opinion along with an ad hominem.
The fact is, I didn't say you were pathetic and stupid. If I had wanted to
say you were pathetic and stupid, I would have said it. I did, however, not
say it. I said your support of Gerry Armstrong's imbecilic, pathetic, kooky,
fucked-up hate page on his critics was pathetic and stupid. Not you
personally.
The rest of your post merely demonstrated your mindless knee-jerk support
of all things Gerry, including his despicable treatment of Bev and his
OSA-style hate page on his critics in which he has the flashing letters
"OSA" which we are supposed to believe are totally meaningless and
not really what they appear to be, which is a flagrant lie that the people on
the page are OSA.
As such, there's really not much point talking about it, any more than
there would be point discussing with a dead frog's leg hooked to a battery
whether or not it was a good idea to jerk when electricity is applied.
Gerry gets criticized, you bounce up to defend it, no matter how insanely
idiotic the action in question is.
April Morning
to make my last post as April (not my real name). Ain't the internet fun (gotta
be safe!)
I don't know anything about Scientology. My spiritual path is through AA. Some
people call AA a cult. Some people call Scientology a cult. Lorien has told me
enough about this whole conflict in scientology with Gerry that I think I will
retreat from this particular argument and go back to my own cult ;-)
Keep the info about contacting Gerry coming though! Lorien wonders what
happened to him.
In article <575016bf.03021...@posting.google.com>,
StacyBro...@hotmail.com says...
>
ptsc
wrote:
>I apologize to Scientologists in my other post. I didn't realize it was a
>religion and I won't criticize a perons's religion. I am shocked by some of the
>tactics employed however, but I suppose that every religion has it's extremists
>("The militant wing of the Salvation Army" Mike Meyers in Austin Powers :-)
>This is not my fight.
>I am just trying to help Lorien so I appreciate the private emails with
>suggestions.
>Peace,
>April
I'd suggest emailing the worm. His email address was
ge...@gerryarmstrong.org when he was last posting and I have
no reason to believe it has changed.
If he is ignoring the email, that would be pretty typical behavior
for the type of guy who pretends to be some kind of guru while
using and exploiting women then dumping them and blackmailing
them with his collection of their email (after cleverly tricking them
into destroying their own copies of *his* email).
Just be warned that whether or not he's "ignoring" the email, he's likely
keeping a copy.
Now, you may not share my cynicism, and if you believe there is an
innocent reason he is not replying to these emails, you could always try
contacting the domain administrator, who is one Pastor Thomas Gandow.
His email address is gan...@dialogzentrum.de
Being a man of God, no doubt he will be helpful.
02/20/03 15:00:11 whois gerryarms...@whois.geektools.com
whois -h whois.geektools.com gerryarmstrong.org ...
GeekTools Whois Proxy v5.0 Ready.
Checking access for 4.33.64.22... ok.
Checking server [whois.publicinterestregistry.net]
Checking server [whois.schlund.de]
Results:
% The data in the WHOIS database of Schlund+Partner AG is provided by
% Schlund+Partner for information purposes, and to assist persons in
% obtaining information about or related to a domain name registration
% record. Schlund+Partner does not guarantee its accuracy. By submitting
% a WHOIS query, you agree that you will use this data only for lawful
% purposes and that, under no circumstances, you will use this data to
% (1) allow, enable, or otherwise support the transmission of mass
% unsolicited, commercial advertising or solicitations via E-mail
% (spam); or
% (2) enable high volume, automated, electronic processes that apply to
% Schlund+Partner or its systems.
% Schlund+Partner reserves the right to modify these terms at any time.
% By submitting this query, you agree to abide by this policy.
domain: gerryarmstrong.org
created: 22-Jul-2002
last-changed: 27-Jan-2003
registration-expiration: 22-Jul-2003
nserver: ns19.schlund.de
nserver: ns20.schlund.de
registrant-firstname: Thomas
registrant-lastname: Gandow
registrant-organization: Dialog Zentrum Berlin e.V.
registrant-street1: Heimat 27
registrant-pcode: 14165
registrant-city: Berlin
registrant-ccode: DE
registrant-phone: +49.308157040
registrant-fax: +49.3084509640
registrant-email: gan...@dialogzentrum.de
admin-c-firstname: Puretec
admin-c-lastname: Hostmaster
admin-c-organization: 1&1 Internet AG
admin-c-street1: Erbprinzenstr. 4-12
admin-c-pcode: 76133
admin-c-city: Karlsruhe
admin-c-ccode: DE
admin-c-phone: +49.190870700
admin-c-fax: +49.1805001372
admin-c-email: hostm...@puretec.de
tech-c-firstname: Thomas
tech-c-lastname: Gandow
tech-c-organization: Dialog Zentrum Berlin e.V.
tech-c-street1: Heimat 27
tech-c-pcode: 14165
tech-c-city: Berlin
tech-c-ccode: DE
tech-c-phone: +49.308157040
tech-c-fax: +49.3084509640
tech-c-email: gan...@dialogzentrum.de
bill-c-firstname: Ansgar
bill-c-lastname: Ljucovic
bill-c-organization: Schlund + Partner AG
bill-c-street1: Erbprinzenstr. 4-12
bill-c-pcode: 76133
bill-c-city: Karlsruhe
bill-c-ccode: DE
bill-c-phone: +49.721913740
bill-c-fax: +49.72191374217
bill-c-email: bil...@schlund.de
% See http://registrar.schlund.info for information about Schlund+Partner AG
Warrior
>
>I'd suggest emailing the worm. His email address was
It still is, as far as I know. Does email sent there bounce?
>ge...@gerryarmstrong.org when he was last posting and I have
>no reason to believe it has changed.
>
>If he is ignoring the email,
And if Gerry is not near his computer and thus unable to read his
email, it would be pretty normal behavior to not be able to respond,
but leave it to ptsc to post in his usual -- attack attack attack,
call names and sling some insults -- manner.
ptsc
>In article <mkca5vgs5vsq9bod6...@4ax.com>, ptsc says...
>And if Gerry is not near his computer and thus unable to read his
>email, it would be pretty normal behavior to not be able to respond,
>but leave it to ptsc to post in his usual -- attack attack attack,
>call names and sling some insults -- manner.
You mean like falsely accusing people of being OSA? How the fuck
SHOULD I respond to that shit? By kissing that fucker's ass? FUCK
Gerry Armstrong and his shit-for-brains OSA site, and FUCK YOU.
Guess what, people don't LIKE IT when you lie about them. Is that
really very fucking difficult to understand?
Nomen Nescio
> ptsc wrote:
> > snip ...
> >
> > I'm afraid Gerry Armstrong is a cad and a bounder who can not be
> > relied on for behavior befitting a decent human being.
>
> I'm sick of your disgusting contempt for people. Go back into
> the hole.
How many spots on the leopard?
Searched Groups for ptsc AND contempt.
Results 1 - 10 of about 604.
Search took 0.23 seconds.
- Scientology and health www.whyaretheydead.net
Beverly Rice
> In article <kn3a5vcj6vpll41eq...@4ax.com>, ptsc says...
> >I also don't dump women and then mock them over the suicide of their
> >husband, as that dirty fucker Gerry Armstrong has done.
Hey Mark, I figure this may be kind of uncomfortable for you, and
I know that you have said many a time you love Gerry, but I have
stated facts that I know you don't want to see.
I love you as a friend, and like I said, I know your love and your
loyalty for Gerry, but I stand firm on what I know.
It's hard taking the stars out of ones eyes.
> Gerry in fact did not mock Beverly over the suicide of her husband.
Yes, it was not really a "mock" . . .
it was a direct, ~covert~ low blow. I know Gerry in that way a
lot better than you do.
But something ~THAT~ low I will not sit back and lick wounds
on . . .
I will expose it openly, and that is exactly what I did.
> His words regarding the heads of the hydra in fact referred to the
> corporate octopus known as Scientology. Gerry explained this back
> on April 11, 2002 in his post "Re: CLamelon Challenge No. 3 (or is
> that 4?)".
I will put the entire post up for people to read, and it is
up to them to see what they want to see.
You know me, what they choose to think is their own business,
to each their own.
I just want you to know that no matter where it goes from here,
I love you as a friend . . . but I already know that I have the
short end of this stick with you <g>.
Fact is, Gerry is a covert little asshole, and all would have
been fine if he had not pulled this super boner, but I have no
intention of sitting back and taking it . . .
and he knows very well I am happy to wait for his "re-emergence".
This post I made still stands as truth.
From: Beverly Rice (dbj...@mpinet.net)
Subject: Re: THE REAL GERRY ARMSTRONG (repost)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Date: 2002-11-18 20:14:23 PST
Gerry Armstrong wrote:
> Just to set the record straight about what follows, Beverly Rice
> completely misinterpreted something I wrote back in April this year,
> took it in a personal way that was unrelated to the way it was
> intended, made a connection which didn't exist, and used it as a
> certainty from which to attack me.
No I didn't, you are a liar, as much as you will try to spin it, I
am very well aware of your covertness . . .
I know why you were picked as being Intel Ops in Co$ for Hubbard,
you are very clever, just as Co$ is very clever until they are
made known.
Your added, unnecessary remark at the end of a post to me in a
thread you made about yourself ~was~ directed as a stab intended
to hurt deep.
You can play ignorant for others.
The fact is that over the two and a half years our "friendship"
spanned shortly after my husbands suicide, when I was still
really messed up and incredibly vulnerable . . .
I shared with you in absolute detail my inner most thoughts,
and the details of my therapy, among many other most personal
aspects of my life, because, as you said . . .
you cared, and we had a special relationship.
One of the things I shared with you, ~explicitly~ . . .
was how everyday statements that are made quite commonly,
such as "I need that like a hole in the head", or "putting a
gun to his/her head", or "just shoot me", or ~anything~ that
had to do with shooting heads, would totally cave me in.
That was explicitly stated to you, and talked about severally.
Your added, unnecessary remark at the end of a post to me when
I was calling you out about making the CST issue about you:
"Oh, and don't go shooting at the heads of the people trying to do what
you think is this most important thing to do."
was a deliberate jab, and was intentional, and you can't play
ignorant, and I won't let you because we both know better.
I know what you pretend to be now, but I also know that you
are still Intel in your heart.
And while we are on that subject, let me tell you another
HubTOADian/Co$ action that you took that has been decried
by many others regarding Co$ tactics as being one of the
worst . . .
and this is the one that I am most disgusted at where you
are concerned.
You were upset when you saw I had saved a few of the e-mails
you sent me, I normally do not keep e-mails after I receive
them, but destroy them, but these were just a couple of
ones that were little jokes between us or a little mushy . . .
but you asked me to delete them, you know, "just in case I
get raided" by the Co$, they won't be in my computer, so I
did . . .
it's called "respect for another human being".
But then, in one of our last conversations . . .
you made a call to me, and out of the blue you tell me that
you have kept every communication and everything I have ever
sent to you over that long period of time of trust and of
confidence . . .
things that Co$ would love to have on me, and things that
would be absolutely devastating to my life . . .
and informed me that you had turned them into a "collection"
of me.
In other words, you did not give me the same consideration
and respect that you demanded for your own self . . .
but then again the truth of the matter is no matter what you
pretend to be now, you ~are~ Intel at heart . . .
and it's a good thing to have complete write-ups of the most
intimate portions of a persons life for your files, isn't it?
You know, something gained along the lines of some words that
were posted on ARS not too long ago that went:
"Scientology's retention of a person's records fraudulently obtained
by the creation of a relationship of "trust" is an excellent issue."
Maybe you feel that only refers to Co$, and not to you when
you do the exact same action.
Except I know better than to ask for my "records" back.
As a matter of fact, I don't even want them back, but would like
the same courtesy from you that you received from me, just destroy
and delete them from existance.
But I know better, I know you won't, because I know you ~can't~ . . .
and I know that you ~don't~ give others the same respect you
receive for yourself, unless they toe the line with you without
question.
For that one action alone, of turning me in to a "collection" that
you keep of my most personal life and my deepest thoughts and
emotions, and the most tragic and secret things of my life . . .
i call you scum.
And you ~are~ a liar. Try to spin this any other way you wish . . .
you are ~NOT~ a "Man of God" . . .
you're not even a man . . .
you've always had to depend on finding a strong woman to be your
"left nut" for you.
You are a fraud, and you are every bit as much a con man as
Hubbard was . . .
just with a much smaller following . . .
Yeh, I know, you are working on that.
ARC = As-Ising the Real Con-Artist,
Beverly
ptsc
>But something ~THAT~ low I will not sit back and lick wounds
>on . . .
>I will expose it openly, and that is exactly what I did.
Which is why I feel slightly less bad about dragging it out than I do.
I did think as to whether I should mention that again for a minute,
but I'd hardly be able to even coherently express what I think is
wrong with Gerry and his behavior without mentioning this particularly
core display of despicable behavior, which was the first thing that
started to give me pause about Gerry. The second was things
relating to Minton and seeming money-laundering. The third was
the kooky hate page. Then I decided to test him to see if he'd
put me on the kooky hate page if I criticized it, so fourth was when
he put me on his kooky hate page for criticizing his kooky hate
page.
At that point, I wrote him off as a loon, something I probably should
have done years ago.
In any case, sorry to drag this up again, but you posted it yourself
in the first place, so I'm slightly less sorry to have done so than I
otherwise would have been. It's a very important part of why I'm
pissed off at the man (or whatever he is) and fits in to the generally
repugnant conduct of Gerry as of late, as well as that which has
merely recently come to light.
Warrior
>>
>>but leave it to ptsc to post in his usual -- attack attack attack,
>>call names and sling some insults -- manner.
In article <95ja5v40m55kptv7p...@4ax.com>, ptsc says...
>
>You mean like falsely accusing people of being OSA?
No, that's not it at all. I guess I missed where Gerry supposedly said
you are OSA. Forgive me, but I thought the page is a collection of links
to posts which support Gerry's _opinion_ that some individuals acted like
OSA goons.
>How the fuck SHOULD I respond to that shit?
In any way you wish.
>By kissing that fucker's ass?
If you wish. It'd probably be easier to kiss Scarff, though. And
Scarff may even welcome your affections.
>FUCK Gerry Armstrong and his shit-for-brains OSA site, and FUCK YOU.
Your profanity is noted.
>Guess what, people don't LIKE IT when you lie about them.
Of course not.
>Is that really very fucking difficult to understand?
Not at all.
anon...@anonymous.poster.comm
>
>How many spots on the leopard?
>
>Searched Groups for ptsc AND contempt.
>Results 1 - 10 of about 604.
>Search took 0.23 seconds.
>
>- Scientology and health www.whyaretheydead.net
Search for ptsc AND shit:
Results 1 - 10 of about 489
Search for ptsc AND fuck:
Results 1 - 10 of about 650
Search for ptsc AND moron:
Results 1 - 10 of about 698
Search for ptsc AND fuck off:
Results 1 - 10 of about 132
Search for ptsc AND suck it:
Results 1 - 10 of about 113
Search for ptsc AND fuck you:
Results 1 - 10 of about 68
Search for ptsc AND FOAD:
Results 1 - 10 of about 65
Zinj
> >You mean like falsely accusing people of being OSA?
>
> No, that's not it at all. I guess I missed where Gerry supposedly said
> you are OSA. Forgive me, but I thought the page is a collection of links
> to posts which support Gerry's _opinion_ that some individuals acted like
> OSA goons.
I note that ptsc specifies 'falsely' accusing people of being OSA goons.
His own accusations are by definition not 'false', and those against the
'fake' Laura are by his shared groupthink 'false'.
Right?
Calling someone OSA (a perennial sport on ARS) is perfectly justifiable
if ptsc and his cronies have decided it is. Calling *them* OSA is
outrageous!.
Note, the 'doing OSA's work for them' = OSA is silliness unworthy of
addressing, no matter *which* camp advances the charge.
> >How the fuck SHOULD I respond to that shit?
>
> In any way you wish.
In general, I've found that ignoring insults is most productive response;
although, the idiots who suffer from 'lastwordism' seem to see it as a
'big win'. Whatcha gonna do?
<snip>
> >Guess what, people don't LIKE IT when you lie about them.
>
> Of course not.
>
> >Is that really very fucking difficult to understand?
>
> Not at all.
Nobody would ever ask ptsc to *like* being insulted, but it's his
apparent belief that spewing pus is an effective response that convinces
the general public that he suffers from some very deep emotional
disturbance. His own fear of Diane is often mirrored in his obvious
desire to emulate her.
It's sad.
Zinj
--
Scientology is the *Cure* for escalating Health Care Costs
'We didn't think it was a big deal'
'She died! People die! - David Miscavige
anon...@anonymous.poster.comm
>
>At that point, I wrote him off as a loon, something I probably should
>have done years ago.
That's a real laff riot!!!!!!!! (as if Rob Clark had one iota of credibility)
Rob Clark calling Gerry a kook- the same guy who- posting as 'henry'-
once made a bomb threat against scientology and then not only denied
it but tried to put the blame on someone else.
from message-id 3nb16r$c...@nyx10.cs.du.edu :
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
in this so-called 'bomb threat,' which is either a
deliberate misattribution or a forgery, i am taken
to task for the heinous crime of threatening to hit
someone with a metaphorical stick.
this proving too tame, the bozos tacked on a line
saying "BLOW UP YOUR LOCAL CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY TODAY!"
and forged it; or some prankish third party did it and
the cult picked it up. it doesn't look like scientology
handiwork, or their typical pathetic forgeries that are
so malformed they don't even work.
i include an email exchange between my sysadmin and
helena kobrin, most of the sysadmin's responses are
taken from a form letter he has for the nearly routine
harassment of nyx users by nut cultists and similar
pressure groups.
this cult is pursuing a policy of harassment against
the contributors to alt.religion.scientology. not
only do they engage in the more traditional kinds
of net abuse, such as vertical spamming and forgery,
they also have invented entirely new forms of abusing
the net and its participants.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Read it in context if you wish-
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&selm=3nb16r%24c4k%40nyx10.cs.du.edu&rnum=1
Stacy.Brooks-Rinder
You are a liar and a well-known fan of the dirty fucker, Gerry
Armstrong. As much as you kiss his dirty ass, your lips couldn't get
much tanner.
Stacy.Brooks-Rinder
> Sorry about the confusion. I was using Michael's computer (not his real name)
> to make my last post as April (not my real name). Ain't the internet fun (gotta
> be safe!)
>
> I don't know anything about Scientology. My spiritual path is through AA. Some
> people call AA a cult. Some people call Scientology a cult. Lorien has told me
> enough about this whole conflict in scientology with Gerry that I think I will
> retreat from this particular argument and go back to my own cult ;-)
>
> Keep the info about contacting Gerry coming though! Lorien wonders what
> happened to him.
Gerry is way too busy scamming others and playing the woeful "I'm a
Scientology victim" card to financially benefit himself - to be
thinking of Lorien or anyone else for that matter.
Stacy.Brooks-Rinder
> >
> >>I have become good friends with Lorien Phippeny and am trying to help her heal
>
> >>from past wounds. A few kind words from Gerry would help. He is not responding
>
> >>to emails so the addresses are no longer active or he is choosing to ignore.
> >>She is not angry with Gerry, just concerned about him. Closure is good. Does
> >>anyone have a valid email address for Gerry?
> >
> >
> > I'm afraid Gerry Armstrong is a cad and a bounder who can not be
> > relied on for behavior befitting a decent human being.
>
> I'm sick of your disgusting contempt for people. Go back into
> the hole.
And what holds your ears apart, Klemesrunt?
Say What?!
>That's a real laff riot!!!!!!!! (as if Rob Clark had one iota of credibility)
The only people who question Rob's credibility are OSA operatives or
morons. (No offense to morons.)
SW
anon...@anonymous.poster.comm
>
>The only people who question Rob's credibility are OSA operatives or
>morons. (No offense to morons.)
>
>SW
Someone who lied before everybody on this ng is capable of doing it again.
Martin Ottmann
> you made a call to me, and out of the blue you tell me that
> you have kept every communication and everything I have ever
> sent to you over that long period of time of trust and of
> confidence ...
>
> things that Co$ would love to have on me, and things that
> would be absolutely devastating to my life ...
>
> and informed me that you had turned them into a "collection"
> of me.
Did you ask him about his intention for doing this? What was his
motive? Did he explain why he insisted that you erase his own e-mails?
Nomen Nescio
> Gerry lies outright when he puts me on a page with a flashing
> "OSA" on it, accusing me of being OSA, ...
It doesn't mean you *are* OSA. You're a kissy-faced OSA lackey
who spreads OSA information about OSA's enemies. Regular OSA
loves your work, but would never openly associate with you.
If you were worried about popularity, you should have chosen a
more respectable career path, like fruit-picker.
Beverly Rice
>
> Beverly Rice <dbj...@mpinet.net> wrote in message news:<3E556C...@mpinet.net>...
>
> > you made a call to me, and out of the blue you tell me that
> > you have kept every communication and everything I have ever
> > sent to you over that long period of time of trust and of
> > confidence ...
> >
> > things that Co$ would love to have on me, and things that
> > would be absolutely devastating to my life ...
> >
> > and informed me that you had turned them into a "collection"
> > of me.
> Did you ask him about his intention for doing this?
It was left on my answering machine, I was no longer returning
his calls.
> What was his motive?
You would have to know Gerry.
> Did he explain why he insisted that you erase his own e-mails?
He was uneasy about them being on my computer, Co$ could get
them.
ARC = As-Ising the Real CST,
Beverly
pts2
E gads, and all along I thought ptsc was fearless! :) And.... why
would anbody "fear" Diane? I mean if Diane is worthy of fear, why
would anybody want to emulate her?
>
> It's sad.
>
> Zinj
Tom
ptsc
wrote:
I suppose you think that Bev is lying, too.
Moron ;-)
Stacy.Brooks-Rinder
> Beverly Rice <dbj...@mpinet.net> wrote in message news:<3E556C...@mpinet.net>...
>
> > you made a call to me, and out of the blue you tell me that
> > you have kept every communication and everything I have ever
> > sent to you over that long period of time of trust and of
> > confidence ...
> >
> > things that Co$ would love to have on me, and things that
> > would be absolutely devastating to my life ...
> >
> > and informed me that you had turned them into a "collection"
> > of me.
>
> Did you ask him about his intention for doing this?
It is apparent - from Gerry's long-standing history of doing ops -
POTENTIAL EXTORTION & BLACKMAIL.
What was his
> motive?
His motive is clearly apparent to everyone that is NOT an ass-kissing
zealot of the Gerry Armstrong Devotion Society.
Stacy.Brooks-Rinder
> In article <2003022109241...@gacracker.org>, Say What?! says...
> >
> >The only people who question Rob's credibility are OSA operatives or
> >morons. (No offense to morons.)
>
True. It's part of the human condition.
"He without sin among you, cast the first stone" - John 8:7
Not Grady Ward
>In article <lgra5vgd78lm969qb...@4ax.com>, ptsc says...
>>At that point, I wrote him off as a loon, something I probably should
>>have done years ago.
>That's a real laff riot!!!!!!!! (as if Rob Clark had one iota of credibility)
Don't forget you're an anonymous dog fucking coward who not only
doesn't post using his real name, doesn't tell people who you are
when asked -- speaking of credibility.
No offense intended.
--- SCAMIZDAT -AB-
It is a woman's lot in life to be fornicated. - L. Ron Hubbard
Zinj
> Xenu allowed () <anon...@anonymous.poster.comm> to write:
>
> >In article <lgra5vgd78lm969qb...@4ax.com>, ptsc says...
> >>At that point, I wrote him off as a loon, something I probably should
> >>have done years ago.
>
> >That's a real laff riot!!!!!!!! (as if Rob Clark had one iota of credibility)
>
> Don't forget you're an anonymous dog fucking coward who not only
> doesn't post using his real name, doesn't tell people who you are
> when asked -- speaking of credibility.
>
> No offense intended.
Hmm... now *why* would I suspect insincerity in this disclaimer? :)
Something that bugs me though; 'credibility' often seems to be seen as an
'absolute' on ARS, for no good reason. Credibility in one area does *not*
extend to another with any reliability. For example, ptsc's
'credibility' in research or legal matters with certainty doesn't extend
to his opinions on matters Minton, or his attacks against the 'enemies de
jour' of his own little 'tribe'.
Likewise, Martin Ottman's 'credibility' in publishing authentic
documents, or in his views on Scientology does not extend to his opinions
on Global Politics, nor does Cerridwen's 'credibility' in publishing
welcome data from Scientology publications increase her credibility in
purely personal squabbles.
Even Chris Owen's very substantial and extensive credibility on *many*
issues only marginally affects his credibility on subjects he's lacking
real experience in, such as 'picketing' or activism.
That's not a bad thing; just something to keep in mind.
In the same way, even being an anonymous dog fucker doesn't
*automatically* 'discredit' a poster, Cerridwen being a prime example.
Data is data. Opinions are opinions. Someone who is not anonymous can be
judged on both more easilly, but, it's not an 'absolute'.
When the 'anonymous dog fucker' on the other hand, uses the anonymity to
'attack' someone however, it certainly is cowardly, and certainly lacks
credibility, whether done by OSA, ptsc himself, garry or any number of
anonymous dog fuckers who spew their crap from hiding.
Fredric L. Rice
>In article <3e56...@news2.lightlink.com>, scam...@linkline.com says...
>> Xenu allowed () <anon...@anonymous.poster.comm> to write:
>>>In article <lgra5vgd78lm969qb...@4ax.com>, ptsc says...
>>>>At that point, I wrote him off as a loon, something I probably should
>>>>have done years ago.
>>>That's a real laff riot!!!!!!!! (as if Rob Clark had one iota of credibility)
>> Don't forget you're an anonymous dog fucking coward who not only
>> doesn't post using his real name, doesn't tell people who you are
>> when asked -- speaking of credibility.
>> No offense intended.
>Hmm... now *why* would I suspect insincerity in this disclaimer? :)
The thing is, though I wasn't really annoyed in the least and was play
acting, I _was_ sincere inasofar as the absurdity of commenting upon
credibility while using an anonymous remailer or fake name. There are an
endless variety of legitimate reasons and needs to use a fake name when
nobody knows who it is. I can see someone using a fake name or a remailer
to discuss stratiegic processes or things he or she doesn't want the
Scientology crooks to associate with themselves, but personal attacks seem
to use anonymity as a face mask to hide their behavior behind.
>Something that bugs me though; 'credibility' often seems to be seen as an
>'absolute' on ARS, for no good reason. Credibility in one area does *not*
>extend to another with any reliability.
I can't agree. I think there is one long time participant on a.r.s that
has demonstrated professional decorum and credibility with every rare
posting, someone who has ignored the political and personal fights, the
mud slinging, and the name calling entirely, someone who has a life. I
can hazard a pre-emptive opinion that the person's professional decorum
extends through the rest of his endeavors -- provisionally so, of course,
since if ever unprofessional behavior were exposed, I'd know better.
>Even Chris Owen's very substantial and extensive credibility on *many*
>issues only marginally affects his credibility on subjects he's lacking
>real experience in, such as 'picketing' or activism.
And that's the guy I'm thinking of.
>That's not a bad thing; just something to keep in mind.
>In the same way, even being an anonymous dog fucker doesn't
>*automatically* 'discredit' a poster,
<smile> I know. I was employing a rude rhetorical device, expressing
annoyance and anger with a smile on my face, not really annoyed or angry
at all, simply trying to goad the anonymous individual into behavior I
wanted the individual to express. Hell, 90% of my rude behavior here is
trying to bait people to reduce them to their primaries, rub off their
sugar coating, and see if I can get to the sour center that is their
true reality.
--
George W. Bush threatens to kill us all -- for oil
http://www.gwbush.com/ http://www.bushwatch.net/
Soon to come: http://www.notserver.com/
Say What?!
>Someone who lied before everybody on this ng is capable of doing it again.
Someone who hasn't lied before everybody on this ng is capable of doing it
for the first time. Does that mean they don't have credibility now?
That's a real laff riot!!!!!!!!
SW
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified.
Say What?!
>Someone who lied before everybody on this ng is capable of doing it again.
Someone who hasn't lied before everybody on this ng is capable of doing it
for the first time. Does that mean they don't have credibility now?
That's a real laff riot!!!!!!!!
SW
Stacy.Brooks-Rinder
>
> > >That's a real laff riot!!!!!!!! (as if Rob Clark had one iota of credibility)
> >
> > Don't forget you're an anonymous dog fucking coward who not only
> > doesn't post using his real name, doesn't tell people who you are
> > when asked -- speaking of credibility.
> >
> > No offense intended.
>
> Hmm... now *why* would I suspect insincerity in this disclaimer? :)
>
> Something that bugs me though; 'credibility' often seems to be seen as an
> 'absolute' on ARS, for no good reason. Credibility in one area does *not*
> extend to another with any reliability. For example, ptsc's
> 'credibility' in research or legal matters with certainty doesn't extend
> to his opinions on matters Minton, or his attacks against the 'enemies de
> jour' of his own little 'tribe'.
snip of mindless blather...
>
> When the 'anonymous dog fucker' on the other hand, uses the anonymity to
> 'attack' someone however, it certainly is cowardly, and certainly lacks
> credibility, whether done by OSA, ptsc himself, garry or any number of
> anonymous dog fuckers who spew their crap from hiding.
Dog fucker, huh? Well, I guess I don't have the integrity of you,
Zinj....let's see...jailbird, pedophile, transient, liar..
I suppose I should have some sympathy for your handicap. You are
obviously paralyzed from the neck up.
Fluffygirl
"Michael Haggerty" <herbert_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b33a5...@enews3.newsguy.com...
> I apologize to Scientologists in my other post. I didn't realize it was a
> religion and I won't criticize a perons's religion. I am shocked by some
of the
> tactics employed however, but I suppose that every religion has it's
extremists
> ("The militant wing of the Salvation Army" Mike Meyers in Austin Powers
:-)
True.
But let me point out that there are many Scn'ists who are not in CofS and
who eschew and reject those practices.
Religion is religion and organization/church is organization/church.
I do criticize CofS. I think their actions should be discussed. But that
also includes anything they do that *isn't* bad. I just think any of it can
be discussed.
But it is, for some, a religion. For me, it's an "applied religious
philosophy" which is one of the things it bills itself.
I think that should be respected and that those with such convictions and
ideas should be treated with some modicum of courtesy and respect but,
still, disagreement can be expressed while still being civil. No reason to
self censor all that much, I think.
Claire
Fluffygirl
"ptsc" <pt...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:kn3a5vcj6vpll41eq...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 20 Feb 2003 17:52:09 +0100, "roger gonnet" <gon...@antisectes.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Well, I know that many US people hate me because I'm criticizing your
> >president and some ways of life, but listen, PTSC: you're hatable
> >regarding what you say about Gerry.
>
> Fuck you. Put up a hate page on me, as Gerry has done, and you'll
> hear of it too. I don't hear you complaining about Gerry's kooky nutty
> page lying about people being OSA, either.
>
> >He's been much more efficient against the crime cult than you'll ever
> >be. You don't have the charism, and you don't say the truth.
>
> Gerry lies outright when he puts me on a page with a flashing "OSA"
> necessary to admit that's what he is doing. Instead he pretends that
> having a flashing "OSA" on his hate page is somehow entirely meaningless,
> something I don't find very believable. In fact, he's a fucking liar.
> Until you have something to say about Gerry's brazen lies about
> me, I do not give a flying fuck what you think, you ass-kissing Frog
> fuckhead. If you want to say anything I've said about that two-faced
> slimy little weasel is untrue, pick it out and argue it.
>
> I also don't dump women and then mock them over the
> suicide of their husband, as that dirty fucker Gerry Armstrong has done.
> some genuinely low-class shitty behavior, the behavior of a scoundrel
> and a coward. No man with any self-respect would trick a lover into
> destroying his email to her, meanwhile keeping her own email to him
> and using it as a blackmail threat against her. That's truly dickless.
> I suppose that kind of behavior is considered okay in France, but here
> it is not popular.
>
> Gerry is, to repeat, a cad and a bounder who can not be relied on for
> anything worthy of a man. I bet his former "helpmeet" Lorien Phippeny has
some
> stories to tell, too, should it ever come to that.
>
> Shall we talk some more about Mr. Armstrong, then and his various
> attributes, or leave it at that?
One thing he did was about a year and a half ago, maybe two, he quoted some
posts I'd written *2 years prior to that* and represented them as having
been written by me a couple months before, rather than a couple years
before.
Not to mention his OSA follies page which contains everyone with whom he's
exchanged words of disagreement.
That sort of thing reminds me of Durian.
C
Fluffygirl
"April Morning" <aprildaw...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b33aq...@enews3.newsguy.com...
> Sorry about the confusion. I was using Michael's computer (not his real
name)
> to make my last post as April (not my real name). Ain't the internet fun
(gotta
> be safe!)
>
> I don't know anything about Scientology. My spiritual path is through AA.
Some
> people call AA a cult. Some people call Scientology a cult.
The church of Scn is the group. Scn itself is the philosophy.
The church does have many cultic aspects.
Scn itself is a body of ideas.
Not all Scn'ists are in CofS.
>
C
Fluffygirl
>
> >And if Gerry is not near his computer and thus unable to read his
> >email, it would be pretty normal behavior to not be able to respond,
> >but leave it to ptsc to post in his usual -- attack attack attack,
> >call names and sling some insults -- manner.
>
> SHOULD I respond to that shit? By kissing that fucker's ass? FUCK
> Gerry Armstrong and his shit-for-brains OSA site, and FUCK YOU.
> really very fucking difficult to understand?
It is very difficult for some people to understand. I've noticed this.
I've had a couple people trail me around the ng, casting aspersions and
making untrue statements about me, and then calling for apologies when I
defend myself.
That is because such people have one standard for people they don't like and
another for those they do like.
And various criteria for liking and disliking, etc.
C
anon...@anonymous.poster.comm
>
>
>"ptsc" <pt...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>news:95ja5v40m55kptv7p...@4ax.com...
>> On 20 Feb 2003 13:05:31 -0800, Warrior <war...@xenu.ca> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <mkca5vgs5vsq9bod6...@4ax.com>, ptsc says...
>>
>> >And if Gerry is not near his computer and thus unable to read his
>> >email, it would be pretty normal behavior to not be able to respond,
>> >but leave it to ptsc to post in his usual -- attack attack attack,
>> >call names and sling some insults -- manner.
>>
>> You mean like falsely accusing people of being OSA? How the fuck
>> SHOULD I respond to that shit? By kissing that fucker's ass? FUCK
>> Gerry Armstrong and his shit-for-brains OSA site, and FUCK YOU.
>> Guess what, people don't LIKE IT when you lie about them. Is that
>> really very fucking difficult to understand?
>
>It is very difficult for some people to understand. I've noticed this.
Especialy some peoples like Rob who seems in belief Gerry accused him of being
OSA. Rob should get a grip on reality and I hope he soon does so before he
looses it. Look Im no fan of Gerry neither but I see Rob full of pretend
stupidness. For lots of time Rob practiced to pretending stupidity after making
his bomb threat then to deny it for some many years of time until it safe to
admit his lies.
April Morning
trying to keep an open mind to learn more about Scientology and
specifically Narconon since I deal with addiction issues everyday. What
is the point of all this hate?
<snip>
>>'nuff said on that. It was pathetic and despicable. Your support of
>>it, however, is merely pathetic and stupid.
>
> I often stand up for the truth as I see it. The fact that you think I
> am "pathetic and stupid" shows that you are an emotional person who
> will post your uninformed opinion along with an ad hominem. The fact
> is, if Gerry had actually been guilty of the thing he has been accused
> of, I would have been one of the first to voice my disgust. My
> position is that a rational person can see Gerry's response for what
> it is -- an honest statement that he was referring to the hydra heads
> of the Scientology conglomerate. Additionally, to take Gerry's
> comments any other way is quite illogical, irrational and not
> foundationed in facts.
>
>
> Warrior - Sunshine disinfects
> http://warrior.xenu.ca
>
April Morning
someone who may be spoofing Gerry
Warrior <war...@xenu.ca> wrote in news:b33fu...@drn.newsguy.com:
> In article <mkca5vgs5vsq9bod6...@4ax.com>, ptsc says...
>>
>>I'd suggest emailing the worm. His email address was
>
> It still is, as far as I know. Does email sent there bounce?
>
>>ge...@gerryarmstrong.org when he was last posting and I have
>>no reason to believe it has changed.
>>
>>If he is ignoring the email,
>
> And if Gerry is not near his computer and thus unable to read his
> email, it would be pretty normal behavior to not be able to respond,
> but leave it to ptsc to post in his usual -- attack attack attack,
> call names and sling some insults -- manner.
>
>
April Morning
including Scientology and Narconon. I am not interested in the
fantastical aspects of religion, either aliens or stories of walking on
water, only on the motivations that such beliefs may instill in people to
lead better lives.
"Fluffygirl" <csw...@comcast.net> wrote in
news:3e57...@news2.lightlink.com:
Warrior
Morning says...
>
>No, it doesn't bounce but I haven't heard anything back either except for
>someone who may be spoofing Gerry
I hope you saved that email and have forwarded a copy to Gerry. You may
wish to post the headers. I'd sure like to know if someone is forging
Gerry's email address.
ka...@wwwaif.net
news:b38ov...@drn.newsguy.com:
<snip>
> Especialy some peoples like Rob who seems in belief Gerry accused him of
> being OSA. Rob should get a grip on reality and I hope he soon does so
> before he looses it. Look Im no fan of Gerry neither but I see Rob full
> of pretend stupidness. For lots of time Rob practiced to pretending
> stupidity after making his bomb threat then to deny it for some many
> years of time until it safe to admit his lies.
You may be "no fan of Gerry", but you seem to be a fan, at least, of one
of his favourite expressions .. "pretending stupidity". Other than Gerry
and his sycophants, I can't think of anyone else who regularly employs the
term to refer to his opponents here on ars. Then again, by a remarkable
coincidence, it appears that many of your posts are, in fact, directed
against the very same posters who turn up on Gerry's infamous "OSA
Follies" webpage. One for Ripley, indeed:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&q=author:anonym
ous%40anonymous.poster.comm+
BTW, your grasp of the English language appears to have weakened since you
began posting to alt.religion.scientology. Any particular reason why?
K
April Morning
If he is reading this why doesn't he just make a fake hotmail or yahoo
account and send me the addr, then I will send him the headers? (except
he should include some indentifying info that only Lorien would know to
prove it is him)
Warrior <war...@xenu.ca> wrote in news:b38ta...@drn.newsguy.com:
Diane Richardson
wrote:
>() <anon...@anonymous.poster.comm> wrote in
>news:b38ov...@drn.newsguy.com:
>
><snip>
>
>> Especialy some peoples like Rob who seems in belief Gerry accused him of
>> being OSA. Rob should get a grip on reality and I hope he soon does so
>> before he looses it. Look Im no fan of Gerry neither but I see Rob full
>> of pretend stupidness. For lots of time Rob practiced to pretending
>> stupidity after making his bomb threat then to deny it for some many
>> years of time until it safe to admit his lies.
>
>
>You may be "no fan of Gerry", but you seem to be a fan, at least, of one
>of his favourite expressions .. "pretending stupidity".
Yeah, I keep waiting to read "really, really stupidly pretending
stupidity" in anon's post. Seems Grabdough just referred to
"pretending stupidity" today, too.
>Other than Gerry
>and his sycophants, I can't think of anyone else who regularly employs the
>term to refer to his opponents here on ars. Then again, by a remarkable
>coincidence, it appears that many of your posts are, in fact, directed
>against the very same posters who turn up on Gerry's infamous "OSA
>Follies" webpage. One for Ripley, indeed:
>
>http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&q=author:anonym
>ous%40anonymous.poster.comm+
>
>
>BTW, your grasp of the English language appears to have weakened since you
>began posting to alt.religion.scientology. Any particular reason why?
Yep, Believe It Or Not, it is.
Diane Richardson
ref...@bway.net
Nessie
"April Morning" <aprildaw...@yahoo.com> schreef in bericht
news:Xns932A92083A1FDap...@129.250.170.82...
> I am interested in anything that helps people get clean and sober,
> including Scientology and Narconon. I am not interested in the
> fantastical aspects of religion, either aliens or stories of walking on
> water, only on the motivations that such beliefs may instill in people to
> lead better lives.
Then, by all means, keep reading ARS why you should
EXCLUDE exactly Scientology and Narconon.
Are you sure you are not already a scientologist yourself?
Several scieno's come in here with all kind of shore stories.
Your postings for sure are starting to sound like it.
So maybe Gerry ignores you for a reason.
Nessie.
http://nessie.psychassualt.org/
http://whyaretheydead.net/
Fluffygirl
> The level of discourse on this thread is appalling. I am new here and am
> trying to keep an open mind to learn more about Scientology and
> specifically Narconon since I deal with addiction issues everyday. What
> is the point of all this hate?
There has always been a fair measure, (oxymoron that this phrase is!) of
flaming and ad hominems on this ng. However, in the past year or two it's
gotten far more pronounced.
This is because a number of folks who did little or none of that have either
left the ng or cut their posting down by like 90% or something.
Not everyone left automatically attacks everything in sight, but a good
percentage of them do.
And still another goodly percentage of them are on semi automatic attack
mode. ;->
Most of the newbies who drift in here these days don't stay long and drift
right out again. Some folks who stay, are mainly interested in personalities
and so forth.
C
>
Jommy Cross
<MPG.18bf2fdfc...@news2.lightlink.com>:
<snip>
>Nobody would ever ask ptsc to *like* being insulted, but it's his
>apparent belief that spewing pus is an effective response that convinces
>the general public that he suffers from some very deep emotional
>disturbance.
d00d, wanna start a cult? We got all the makings. I'll shill em in and you
can find their ruin.
> His own fear of Diane is often mirrored in his obvious
>desire to emulate her.
Ah yes, oh wise one. Your profound genius-level insights have changed my
life beyond recognition.
Ever yours in fandom,
Jommy Cross
---------------------------------------------------
This message brought to you by Radio Free Albemuth:
before you hallucinate
--------------------------------------------------
Jommy Cross
wrote in msg <3e57c477$1...@news2.lightlink.com>:
<snip>
>But it is, for some, a religion. For me, it's an "applied religious
>philosophy" which is one of the things it bills itself.
Is that *one* of the things? What about floorwax and dessert topping?
>
>I think that should be respected
Respect is earned.
>and that those with such convictions and
>ideas should be treated with some modicum of courtesy and respect
Oh, sure. All due respect.
> but,
>still, disagreement can be expressed while still being civil. No reason to
>self censor all that much, I think.
Me neither.
April Morning
Scientologist? Unless they came in the middle of the night and turned me
into a pod person, I don't think I am a Scientologist.
;-)
I am aware of Scientology history but I believe in keeping an open mind.
I am sure someone got clean and sober in Narconon. I am sure that person
thinks it is good. I love AA. People call it a cult all them time. Who
cares? The good thing about AA is that it is free and they don't come
after you if you disagree. It's fun to imagine AA "intell ops" though.
Might make a good book. Narconon/AA/Narcotics Anonymous/Rational
Recovery/Smart Recovery/Jesus -- whatever works. I know about everything
except Narconon. I am waiting for some sensible person to tell me about
it but I there aren't many on this ng (first impressions, I hope I am
wrong)
"Nessie" <ness...@SPAMpsychassualt.org> wrote in
news:3e5836ec$1...@news2.lightlink.com:
April Morning
out of it. Quit sending me mail and don't bother answering my innocent
questions about Narconon. AA sez "we have no opinions about outside
issues" and that is where I would like to leave it. I want no part of this
religious war -- I am fried already on the whole Bin Laden thing.
aprildaw...@yahoo.com (April Morning) wrote in
news:b3148...@enews2.newsguy.com:
> I have become good friends with Lorien Phippeny and am trying to help
> her heal from past wounds. A few kind words from Gerry would help. He
> is not responding to emails so the addresses are no longer active or
> he is choosing to ignore. She is not angry with Gerry, just concerned
> about him. Closure is good. Does anyone have a valid email address for
> Gerry?
>
Michael 'Mike' Gormez
Morning <aprildaw...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Recovery/Smart Recovery/Jesus -- whatever works. I know about everything
>except Narconon. I am waiting for some sensible person to tell me about
>it but I there aren't many on this ng (first impressions, I hope I am
>wrong)
If you want answers what it is look here http://www.narconon-exposed.net
and if you want unsubstantiated crap look here http://www.narconon.org
Mike Gormez
- Scientology and health www.whyaretheydead.net
- 'Religious' child abuse and neglect www.taxexemptchildabuse.net
- Visit Occupied Clearwater with Nessie http://nessie.psychassualt.org/
- The hearing transcripts http://whyaretheydead.net/lisa_mcpherson/bob/
CL
Hash: SHA1
"ka...@wwwaif.net" <ka...@wwwaif.net> wrote:
>() <anon...@anonymous.poster.comm> wrote in
>news:b38ov...@drn.newsguy.com:
>
><snip>
>
>>Especialy some peoples like Rob who seems in belief Gerry accused
>>him of being OSA. Rob should get a grip on reality and I hope he
>>soon does so before he looses it. Look Im no fan of Gerry neither
>>but I see Rob full of pretend stupidness. For lots of time Rob
>>practiced to pretending stupidity after making his bomb threat then
>>to deny it for some many years of time until it safe to admit his
>>lies.
>
>
>You may be "no fan of Gerry", but you seem to be a fan, at least, of
>one of his favourite expressions .. "pretending stupidity". Other
>than Gerry and his sycophants, I can't think of anyone else who
>regularly employs the term to refer to his opponents here on ars.
>Then again, by a remarkable coincidence, it appears that many of your
>posts are, in fact, directed against the very same posters who turn
>up on Gerry's infamous "OSA Follies" webpage.
Well, I guess we all should have known by the nick: it was obvious that
someone who is even a bigger () than * was at work.
CL
==================================SIG==================================
The so-called "A.R.S. Week In Review" is a white-washed propaganda rag
whose excuse for an "editor"--Rod Keller--uses extreme socio-political
censorship to hide important material facts from anyone relying on it.
Keller is in a deep state of denial on the existence and power of the
corporation known as "Church of Spiritual Technology" (CST--doing
business as the "L. Ron Hubbard Library"), and the three tax lawyers who
control it: Sherman Lenske, Stephen Lenske, and Lawrence E. Heller. CST
is the owner of all Scientology-related intellectual property, and is
the senior and most powerful corporation in all of Scientology. Keller
"sanitizes" his publication, keeping out of it of all mention of CST and
the non-Scientologist attorneys running it. Anyone in pursuit or support
of truth and integrity should boycott "A.R.S. Week in Review." Read the
newsgroup alt.religion.scientology for yourself and learn the truth.
=======================================================================
"In Wollersheim's case, make that lying, millionaire, winner scumbag."
--Michael Reuss, Honorary Kid
=======================================================================
"Your latest 'post' was longer than two paragraphs, so I didn't read it."
--booboo...@webtv.net (Tigger)
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBPlg0PtAKsx0v8qcvEQInxACgz0I1FAsPB6NkDeedlhifWMmBwM4An1Vm
gLk8QFnHSPdeBdaHdPQatDRU
=EKKm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Thomas Gandow
April Morning wrote:
> Yes, It's saved but I still don't know if I have a valid address for him.
> If he is reading this why doesn't he just make a fake hotmail or yahoo
> account and send me the addr, then I will send him the headers? (except
> he should include some indentifying info that only Lorien would know to
> prove it is him)
>
His email is ge...@gerryarmstrong.org.
Why in the world do You want to contact him out of the blue and
get a direct answer immediatly?
Who are You?
TG
Thomas Gandow
April Morning wrote:
> I am interested in anything that helps people get clean and sober,
> including Scientology and Narconon.
Scientology and Narconon do not help people to get sober and
clean, but make themonly fanatic and clear.
Why in the world do You come out of the blue and try to contact
directly Gerry Armstrong?
TG
Hartley Patterson
> I know about everything
> except Narconon. I am waiting for some sensible person to tell me about
> it but I there aren't many on this ng (first impressions, I hope I am
> wrong)
Would you write to a tabloid newspaper asking for a rational and well
researched article about a controversial subject? This is a *newsgroup*.
It deals in news (!), gossip, rumour, flamewars, etc. It is not a source
of reasoned and considered information, that is to be found on the many
websites about Scientology.
For the official view, go to the Narconon website. For an opposing view,
Chris Owen's website.
--
"I think of my beautiful city in flames"
A medieval spreadsheet, enturbulating entheta and
how to outrun Thread.
http://www.newsfrombree.co.uk
Nessie
> Is there a test kit available at the drug store to see if I am a
> Scientologist? Unless they came in the middle of the night and turned me
> into a pod person, I don't think I am a Scientologist.
> ;-)
>
> I am aware of Scientology history but I believe in keeping an open mind.
> I am sure someone got clean and sober in Narconon. I am sure that person
> thinks it is good. I love AA. People call it a cult all them time. Who
> cares? The good thing about AA is that it is free and they don't come
> after you if you disagree. It's fun to imagine AA "intell ops" though.
> Might make a good book. Narconon/AA/Narcotics Anonymous/Rational
> Recovery/Smart Recovery/Jesus -- whatever works. I know about everything
> except Narconon. I am waiting for some sensible person to tell me about
> it but I there aren't many on this ng (first impressions, I hope I am
> wrong)
There are more websites (pro/anti) on Narconon than on
any other so-called 'addiction help' and still you post it's the
only one you have to find out about. You are either fucking
ignorant or daft like hell.
I'm sure Gerry is aware of you, so why does he not answer
your mails?
Nessie
"Michael 'Mike' Gormez" <mi...@psychassualt.org> schreef in bericht
news:ni2h5v08ubol0t294...@4ax.com...
> In article <Xns932AEDDC84434ap...@129.250.170.100> , April
> Morning <aprildaw...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Recovery/Smart Recovery/Jesus -- whatever works. I know about everything
> >except Narconon. I am waiting for some sensible person to tell me about
> >it but I there aren't many on this ng (first impressions, I hope I am
> >wrong)
>
> If you want answers what it is look here http://www.narconon-exposed.net
> and if you want unsubstantiated crap look here http://www.narconon.org
I noticed that one is only sensible if one writes positive about
NarCONon. Why does this 'April Joker' thinks Gerry had
anything positive to say about NarCONon? What has one
to do with the other? What is the real reason for wanting
contact with Gerry?
Stacy.Brooks-Rinder
> April Morning wrote:
>
> > Yes, It's saved but I still don't know if I have a valid address for him.
> > If he is reading this why doesn't he just make a fake hotmail or yahoo
> > account and send me the addr, then I will send him the headers? (except
> > he should include some indentifying info that only Lorien would know to
> > prove it is him)
> >
>
> His email is ge...@gerryarmstrong.org.
>
> Why in the world do You want to contact him out of the blue and
> get a direct answer immediatly?
Why not?
>
> Who are You?
> TG
None of your business, fuckbrain. It's between her and Gerry.
Fluffygirl
<root@127.1> wrote in message
news:86jg5vksrmd708a1i...@4ax.com...
> In <3e57c477$1...@news2.lightlink.com>, "Fluffygirl" <csw...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
> ... snip ...
> >But it is, for some, a religion. For me, it's an "applied religious
> >philosophy" which is one of the things it bills itself.
>
Sorry, babe. OT stuff is confidential. I wouldn't even discuss that with
someone I knew and liked.
>
> When will you achieve godhood? (For an event like that, I wanna make
> sure my calendar's clear.)
What a silly thing to say.
Scn'ists are looking for the same thing many students of religion and
philosophy and various practices such as magick are. Spiritual growth.
Being nasty about it only reflects on you. Not those whom you are mocking.
C
Fluffygirl
> I did my part for a non-internet enabled friend and now I want to be left
> out of it. Quit sending me mail and don't bother answering my innocent
> questions about Narconon. AA sez "we have no opinions about outside
> issues" and that is where I would like to leave it. I want no part of this
> religious war -- I am fried already on the whole Bin Laden thing.
I don't want to be rude or confrontational but I must point out that people
are passionate about religion and politics. CofS -and even Scn- are a
mixture of both. Lots of hot potatoes there. Lots and lots and lots.
This is an ng for discussion of Scn and related subjects, as you know. It's
mainly populated by people who, for one reason or another, are angry with
the church. Some of them have been treated badly by it, some are just here
to jeer and make fun, and some are here for other reasons.
But what they all have in common is a distrust and dislike for various
practices of the church.
In addition, there've been a number of church operatives operating here but
pretending to be someone or something else. So the resulting paranoia on
this board is at a very high level.
You wanted to get in touch with someone who not only is on the church's hate
list, so to speak, but also is one of the more angry, paranoid and vitriolic
members of the critical community and whose friends and acquaintances are of
similar mindset and tactics. This put you on the spot. And coupled with the
fact that there've been operatives here, and the fact that Armstrong and
others have reason to be very careful about people they don't know...well,
you got what you got.
I was glad to see another person here who actually wanted to discuss things
and I still would be.
But if posting here is annoying, upsetting, makes you uncomfortable, or just
plain is not where your interests lie, then I wish you the best and will
just say adieu.
C
Fluffygirl
<root@127.1> wrote in message
news:iv5i5v8i5kkq5vebd...@4ax.com...
> In <3e59...@news2.lightlink.com>, "Fluffygirl" <csw...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
> >
> ><root@127.1> wrote in message
> >news:86jg5vksrmd708a1i...@4ax.com...
> >> In <3e57c477$1...@news2.lightlink.com>, "Fluffygirl" <csw...@comcast.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> ... snip ...
> >> >But it is, for some, a religion. For me, it's an "applied religious
> >> >philosophy" which is one of the things it bills itself.
> >>
> >> Have you gotten your BTs to talk back to you yet?
> >
> >Sorry, babe. OT stuff is confidential. I wouldn't even discuss that with
> >someone I knew and liked.
>
> lucky, there's still time to get out with your mind intact.
>
> >> When will you achieve godhood? (For an event like that, I wanna make
> >> sure my calendar's clear.)
> >
> >What a silly thing to say.
> >
> >Scn'ists are looking for the same thing many students of religion and
> >philosophy and various practices such as magick are. Spiritual growth.
> >
> >Being nasty about it only reflects on you. Not those whom you are
mocking.
>
> little god. I was asking if you were getting what you paid for.
I got into Scn for spiritual development.
And yes, I found it.
so there you go.
>Your
> avoidance makes you look silly. You haven't gotten what you paid for
> and you're still hoping it'll happen. What's that old saw that Gomer
> Pyle used to use every now and then? "Fool me once, shame on me. Fool
> me twice, shame on you ..."
>
> How many times have you been fooled?
I dunno. Been so long since anyone's been able to do it...
C
April Morning
this enough so I want to make a hasty retreat. I feel like a picked up a
hot potato and it started to burn. They say that no good deed goes un-
punished (who are "they" anyway?) ;-)
It's too much of a hall of mirrors for me.
I might be back later to do an independent discussion of Narconon. The
google info on it (also reported to me by some) has been interesting.
I like to keep an open mind about recovery programs because the situation
amongst the addicted is desperate. I am as skeptical about Scientology as
I am about all religious belief systems, but I would rather that someone
was a clean and sober Scientologist than an out-of-control drunk driver.
I hope that people would try AA or NA or both first, because it is free
and proven to be successful for many, but if these don't work then I feel
that people should try whatever else there is left to try before they
kill themselves or someone else. My motivation for learning about
Narconon (from unbiased information) is that I might one day recommend it
to someone who has tried everything else.
As far as all these spooky theories about who I am or why I wrote -- I
don't know what to say. You are going to believe what you want. I assure
you that I am on the level about everything except my nick (Everyone
should know not to use their real name on usenet) because my AA program
teaches me to be as honest as the situation warrents, without hurting
myself or others.
I apologize to all for being critical in one of my posts.
As for Lorien, it seems her original question has been answered in an
indirect way. I sincerely regret posting her name here. I did not
anticipate the level of hostility, the intensity of the emotion, the
amount of distrust and suspicion, the level of intrigue. I feel vaguely
threatened by it all. I sincerely hope that people will leave Lorien
alone since she is a sweet person that harbors only good feelings for
Gerry and has since moved on to caring for the environment and teaching
people to stay healthy.
Peace
"Fluffygirl" <csw...@comcast.net> wrote in
news:3e59...@news2.lightlink.com:
<snip>
Joe's Garage
>
>
> April Morning wrote:
>
> > Yes, It's saved but I still don't know if I have a valid address for him.
> > If he is reading this why doesn't he just make a fake hotmail or yahoo
> > account and send me the addr, then I will send him the headers? (except
> > he should include some indentifying info that only Lorien would know to
> > prove it is him)
> >
>
> His email is ge...@gerryarmstrong.org.
>
> Why in the world do You want to contact him out of the blue and
> get a direct answer immediatly?
>
> Who are You?
> TG
Another unaccountable minder who wants Gerry to be accountable.
Joe Cisar http://cisar.org
The Press and Public Relations Policies of Layfayette Ronald Hubbard
http://www.xenu.net/archive/thesis/cisar-home.html
To all those on ARS who think that the wolf always comes to the door
wearing the same disguise, I say go read some history ... Bob Minton
Fluffygirl
<root@127.1> wrote in message
news:9cgj5vku8nh67guen...@4ax.com...
> In <3e592ac0$1...@news2.lightlink.com>, "Fluffygirl" <csw...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
> >
> ><root@127.1> wrote in message
> >> How many times have you been fooled?
> >
> >I dunno. Been so long since anyone's been able to do it...
>
That's not what I wrote.
This is a discussion group. It therefore does not make much sense to pose an
(alleged) question and then answer it for the other person.
Let me know when you want some real dialogue.
C
Tanya Durni
Fluffygirl wrote:
> <root@127.1> wrote in message
> news:86jg5vksrmd708a1i...@4ax.com...
>
>>In <3e57c477$1...@news2.lightlink.com>, "Fluffygirl" <csw...@comcast.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>> ... snip ...
>>
>>>But it is, for some, a religion. For me, it's an "applied religious
>>>philosophy" which is one of the things it bills itself.
>>
>>Have you gotten your BTs to talk back to you yet?
>
>
> Sorry, babe. OT stuff is confidential. I wouldn't even discuss that with
> someone I knew and liked.
Confidential in the eyes of the CofS and protected with copyrights, no
less.
"I do criticize CofS. I think their actions should be discussed."
Fluffygirl.
Since when is OT stuff not an action of the CofS?
>
>
>>When will you achieve godhood? (For an event like that, I wanna make
>>sure my calendar's clear.)
>
> What a silly thing to say.
I agree, it would have been better to ask you when will you achieve
power over your universe with OT abilities?
>
> Scn'ists are looking for the same thing many students of religion and
> philosophy and various practices such as magick are. Spiritual growth.
That is the con to convince you to spend limited amounts of money and
energy to "keeping scientology working".
>
> Being nasty about it only reflects on you. Not those whom you are mocking.
I agree. However, being nasty is one of Hubbard's hidden agenda's.
Look at his policies starting with disconnection of families.
>
> C
>
>
Tanya Durni
Fluffygirl wrote:
> "April Morning" <aprildaw...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:b33aq...@enews3.newsguy.com...
>
>>Sorry about the confusion. I was using Michael's computer (not his real
>
> name)
>
>>to make my last post as April (not my real name). Ain't the internet fun
>
> (gotta
>
>>be safe!)
>>
>>I don't know anything about Scientology. My spiritual path is through AA.
>
> Some
>
>>people call AA a cult. Some people call Scientology a cult.
>
>
> The church of Scn is the group. Scn itself is the philosophy.
>
> The church does have many cultic aspects.
>
> Scn itself is a body of ideas.
>
> Not all Scn'ists are in CofS.
According to the CofS Claire is a "criminal" and is not allowed to be a
scientologist or communicate with one for that matter.
http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/sp-declare-swazey.htm
Claire (aka fluffygirl) can be redeemed by the cofs by redoing steps
A-E. It seems to me, that redoing the beginning steps of the process up
the OT Bridge would be an insult to someone who has been in the group
for a while. However, if that person is displaying deviant behavior
from the group, they must be reconditioned in order to be let back into
the group. The reconditioning occurs by using the "tech" with the
guidance of good standing church members, not SP's like Claire.
>
>
> C
>
>
Warrior
>> in his ignorance wrote:
>>>
>>>I also don't dump women and then mock them over the suicide of their
>>>husband, as that dirty fucker Gerry Armstrong has done.
>Warrior wrote:
>>
>> Gerry in fact did not mock Beverly over the suicide of her husband.
>>
>> His words regarding the heads of the hydra in fact referred to the
>> corporate octopus known as Scientology. Gerry explained this back
>> on April 11, 2002 in his post "Re: CLamelon Challenge No. 3 (or is
>> that 4?)".
In article <3E556C...@mpinet.net>, Beverly says...
>
>Hey Mark, I figure this may be kind of uncomfortable for you, and
>I know that you have said many a time you love Gerry, but I have
>stated facts that I know you don't want to see.
It's not a matter of whether I want to see anything or not. I am
fully able and willing to deal with anything and everything anyone
wishes to show me. My life is a quest for truth; as such, I don't
shy away from confronting certain things that might cause me
discomfort, or cause me to question and re-examine my beliefs.
You know I care for both you and Gerry. Having said this again,
the only part I find uncomfortable about this whole matter is how
a few hateful individuals (I'm not talking about you here, Bev) have
been attempting to spin this into something it is not, and never
has been. Friendship has nothing to do with how I see things. I am
not the subject of this discussion, and I have no personal stake in
it. That is, I have nothing to lose. What I do see is that you are
being emotional; and who can blame you? I certainly can't and don't.
After what you've been through, I think your reaction is not unusual
nor is it unexpected. After all, you not only lost your husband, but
in a way, you lost Gerry, too.
It is not uncommon for an individual who has lost a loved one to
go to pieces over normal things. I know this well, having lost my
wife suddenly and unexpectedly in 1987. During the next year
or so after her death, everyday things, people and places could,
and often did trigger heavy grief in me. I couldn't drive down
a certain street without becoming very sad; a particular restaurant
where Vicky and I had celebrated our anniversary was a reminder
of my loss. It was the same with women who were 5 feet tall with
naturally blonde hair like Vicky. A blonde woman driving a Nissan
Sentra could, and did cause me to lose my composure. These sorts
of occurrences would remind me of the loss of my loved one. This
is a normal reaction in people. One of the ways I dealt with my
loss was by moving back to Texas, so as to get away from certain
"restimulative" things in my environment.
So believe me, I DO very well know that certain phrases, words,
events, things, and/or people can trigger emotional responses.
You've already explicitly stated that certain "everyday statements
that are made quite commonly, such as 'I need that like a hole in
the head', or 'putting a gun to his/her head', or 'just shoot me',
or ~anything~ that had to do with shooting heads" would "totally
cave [you] in."
Yet, you are the one who first mentioned the "heads of the Hydra".
(See your two posts of April 6, 2002, quoted in part below.) It
appears to me that perhaps you unintentionally set the stage for
a response that would be upsetting to you.
You said:
"and the only real relevance is that the next time
RTC decides to bring a lawsuit against anybody for
copyright or any other infringement that the party
involved be aware of every entity the Hydra known
as the Co$ has so they can have the opportunity to
set ~all~ the heads of the Hydra on the chopping
block, that is the only way to reach the "heart"
of the matter."
In the context of the discussion, which WAS, after all, about
CST and the _Scientology_ "hydra", it is not illogical that Gerry
would have used the phrase he did, in response to something you
had not only written about, but in which you used the words "set
~all~ the heads of the Hydra on the chopping block".
Again, I submit that Gerry's statement was not intended as a
covert jab at you, or an attempt to "cave you in", or anything of
the sort. Also, I don't have the "short end of the stick" and I do
very much disagree with your opinion that Gerry is a "covert little
asshole", or any sort of asshole, except perhaps in the eyes of a
few hateful individuals like Garry Scarff and some Scientologists
like Heber Jentzsch, Mike Rinder and David Miscavige.
In Bev's April 6, 2002 post -- the first with a mention of "the heads
of the Hydra" -- she said:
"The fact that is of interest is that the awareness of
CST has been brought to light . . .
"and the only real relevance is that the next time
RTC decides to bring a lawsuit against anybody for
copyright or any other infringement that the party
involved be aware of every entity the Hydra known
as the Co$ has so they can have the opportunity to
set ~all~ the heads of the Hydra on the chopping
block, that is the only way to reach the "heart"
of the matter."
See the post here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl801782481d&dq=&hl=en&selm=3CAFB5D5.3CB%40mpinet.net
And on the same day Bev wrote in yet a different post:
"Again, the most important thing is to bring ~ALL~
the heads of the Hydra in the open, and that way
one knows what they are dealing with."
See that post here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl801782481d&dq=&selm=3CAFC108.3684%40mpinet.net&rnum=4
One more thing, and it is in regards to the emails you
deleted, allegedly at Gerry's request. I consider that
to be advice I wish he had given to you earlier. Then
perhaps a certain despicable OSA snake would not have
been able to snoop your emails.
I love you both, and it saddens me to see two friends having
trouble between each other. It is my sincere wish and prayer
that Gerry and you will resolve this matter. I believe you
are both good people.
Warrior
Scarff, using the identity of StacyBro...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>You are a liar and a well-known fan of the dirty fucker, Gerry
>Armstrong.
I'm thankful for having a friend like Gerry.
ptsc
Amazing. Bev mentions something in particular deeply upsets her, so you go
out of your way to write an obsessive hundreds of lines long rant about that
very subject. Don't quit your day job, you'd make a shitty therapist.
ptsc
>In article <575016bf.03022...@posting.google.com>, Garry
>Scarff, using the identity of StacyBro...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>You are a liar and a well-known fan of the dirty fucker, Gerry
>>Armstrong.
>
>I'm thankful for having a friend like Gerry.
I'm thankful to know what kind of person he truly is, rather than being duped
by him, since he was kind enough to put me on his nutty hate page and accuse
me of being OSA for having the temerity to criticize the lunacy of having a hate
page calling people OSA in the first place. It's nice to know a fascist enemy
rather than have a snake-in-the-grass fake ally.
Fluffygirl
"ptsc" <pt...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:0ago5v06ca6oceltb...@4ax.com...
There are some people about whom this can be said:
An insult from him (or, in some cases,her) is like a Nobel Peace Prize from
anyone else.
C
Fluffygirl
"Joe's Garage" <swa...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.3.96.10302...@darkstar.zippy...
> On Sun, 23 Feb 2003, Thomas Gandow wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > April Morning wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, It's saved but I still don't know if I have a valid address for
him.
> > > If he is reading this why doesn't he just make a fake hotmail or yahoo
> > > account and send me the addr, then I will send him the headers?
(except
> > > he should include some indentifying info that only Lorien would know
to
> > > prove it is him)
> > >
> >
> > His email is ge...@gerryarmstrong.org.
> >
> > Why in the world do You want to contact him out of the blue and
> > get a direct answer immediatly?
> >
> > Who are You?
> > TG
>
> Another unaccountable minder who wants Gerry to be accountable.
Everyone should be accountable for their actions and their statements.
C
Warrior
>
>Everyone should be accountable for their actions and their statements.
>
>C
Yes, even those who employ killfiles so as to avoid having to read
questions about their previously made statements.
Warrior
>
>I'm thankful to know what kind of person he truly is, rather than being duped
>by him, since he was kind enough to put me on his nutty hate page and accuse
<snip>
Gerry didn't accuse you of being OSA, but he definitely implied that you
act like an OSA goon towards him. Your words support his opinion. Deal
with it. It's not my problem. :)
Warrior
>
>Amazing. Bev mentions something in particular deeply upsets her, so
>you go out of your way to write an obsessive hundreds of lines long
>rant about that very subject. Don't quit your day job, you'd make a
>shitty therapist.
Amazing. I wrote about something which is upsetting to me, so you go
out of your way to write an obsessive three lines-long rant about me.
Don't quit your day job; you probably need the money. :)
Bev has repeatedly shown her willingness to communicate on the subject,
as evidenced by her posts to ars. Besides, Beverly directed certain
statements to me, specifically. In doing so, it is not unreasonable
that she should expect a response.
And you are the first one to respond in this thread and bring up your
allegations concerning Beverly and Gerry.
My post was not at all a rant. In fact, I spent a few hours over the
past three days thinking about and writing my response.
ptsc
>In article <0ago5v06ca6oceltb...@4ax.com>, ptsc says...
>>I'm thankful to know what kind of person he truly is, rather than being duped
>>by him, since he was kind enough to put me on his nutty hate page and accuse
>>me of being OSA...
>Gerry didn't accuse you of being OSA, but he definitely implied that you
>act like an OSA goon towards him. Your words support his opinion. Deal
>with it. It's not my problem. :)
We've already gone through this and your blatant lies about it repeatedly.
You choose to pretend that the blinking "OSA" doesn't mean anything, like
some kind of brainwashed zombie.
Then the <title> tag was changed to
"Gerry Armstrong--Posts by a.r.s. participants who claim to not be formally
employed OSA staff or formally operated OSA agents but who, in and with
pretended stupidity, forward OSA's purposes by attacking the Scientology cult's
fair game victims."
It was previously
"Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops."
If there was nothing wrong with it, then why did he sneakily change it without
ever retracting it?
Describing people as "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops" so clearly
is an accusation of being OSA (or otherwise a Scientology agent) that it would
take a true moron to pretend otherwise.
Warrior
>>>
>>>I'm thankful to know what kind of person he truly is, rather than
>>>being duped by him, since he was kind enough to put me on his nutty
>>>hate page and accuse me of being OSA...
The hateful thing on his site are your words. So it is understandable
that you feel uncomfortable about that.
>On 25 Feb 2003 20:36:22 -0800, Warrior <war...@xenu.ca> wrote:
>>
>>Gerry didn't accuse you of being OSA, but he definitely implied that you
>>act like an OSA goon towards him. Your words support his opinion. Deal
>>with it. It's not my problem. :)
In article <8qjo5vsbm3tb04amr...@4ax.com>, ptsc says...
>
>We've already gone through this and your blatant lies about it repeatedly.
I have not lied. And if we've already been through this, why did you
bring it up again in response to my post which was a response to Scarff's
post? Could it be that you are unable to resist posting hateful remarks?
>You choose to pretend that the blinking "OSA" doesn't mean anything, like
>some kind of brainwashed zombie.
No. You chose to mischaracterize my opinion when you stated that blinking
letters don't mean anything to me. You do this sort of thing repeatedly.
>Then the <title> tag was changed to
>"Gerry Armstrong--Posts by a.r.s. participants who claim to not be formally
>employed OSA staff or formally operated OSA agents but who, in and with
>pretended stupidity, forward OSA's purposes by attacking the Scientology
>cult's fair game victims."
I know. You don't have to tell me.
>It was previously "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops."
I know. You don't have to tell me.
>If there was nothing wrong with it, then why did he sneakily change it
>without ever retracting it?
I never said there was nothing wrong with it. Do you know why Gerry
changed the title of the page? And I note your use of the word "sneakily
-- as if he could change the title without anyone noticing. Geez.
>Describing people as "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops" so clearly
>is an accusation of being OSA (or otherwise a Scientology agent) that it
>would take a true moron to pretend otherwise.
Surely you do not think I have described you as "Scientology's Usenet
Black PR and Ops". Only a true moron would think I have done so.
Like I said, Gerry never accused you of being OSA. Only an emotional and
irrational person like you could see what you in your blind hatred see.
ptsc
>>>In article <0ago5v06ca6oceltb...@4ax.com>, ptsc says...
>>>>
>>>>I'm thankful to know what kind of person he truly is, rather than
>>>>being duped by him, since he was kind enough to put me on his nutty
>>>>hate page and accuse me of being OSA...
>The hateful thing on his site are your words. So it is understandable
>that you feel uncomfortable about that.
You really are going out of your way to be stupid, aren't you. What's hateful
about this post, which is on the idiot hate page you slobber all over yourself
defending? All it says is that Armstrong's idiot hate page is an idiot hate
page.
I suppose the truth is hateful to people who hate the truth.
Here's one of the "hateful" posts you think it is justified to have put on a
page falsely accusing people of being OSA, a lie you defend to the point
of lying about it.
This is, I believe, the very first of my posts that your lunatic buddy Gerry
Armstrong put up on his idiot hate page out of insane revenge for me having
dared to call his idiot hate page an idiot hate page.
Where's the "hate" in this post? Or were you just lying?
---
From: ptsc <ptsc AT nym DOT cryptofortress DOT com>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: goOn SquAd follies kick it up on www.gerryarmstrong.org
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 11:12:19 -0500
Organization: Busts Your Rips!
Message-ID: <vqfftu8ckuogmntck...@4ax.com>
References: <n7cftuk500hlvjha9...@4ax.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: ab...@supernews.com
Lines: 15
On Sun, 17 Nov 2002 16:16:34 +0100, Gerry Armstrong <ge...@gerryarmstrong.org>
wrote:
>Yes, the long-awaited goOn SquAd follies are in revue at
>http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/usenet/goon-squad-follies.html
Are you alleging that Deana Holmes, Diane Richardson, Rebecca
Hartong and others are OSA? I can't see any other meaning to the
capitalization of the letters "O," "S," and "A" in "goOn SquAd."
This is somewhat distressing, since I used to think you were a person
who valued your honesty. Does it bother you at all to have sunk to the
level of a brazen liar? What accounts for this unaccountable lunacy?
ptsc
Nomen Nescio
<snap>
On 25 Feb 2003 20:36:22 -0800, Warrior <war...@xenu.ca> wrote:
<snap>
God damn, this is one helluva an exciting exchange of views you two are
having!
With each never-heard-of, never-dreamed-of retort I'm blown away one more
time.
Keeping up with the subtle changes of meaning has left me gasping. <gasp,
gasp>
Thanks, you guys. Thank you. Thank you.
You don't find action like this in many places. But I gotta go to one of
those places now. My toilet!
A plonk on both your houses!!
Warrior
>
>You really are going out of your way to be stupid, aren't you.
No, I am not. You seem to be more interested in continuing to assert
your mistaken understanding than you are in understanding what others
are saying to you.
>What's hateful about this post, which is on the idiot hate page you
>slobber all over yourself defending?
What's hateful is *you*; you seem to hate yourself, and you seem to be
completely unable to express yourself without using insulting language.
Rather than trying to understand Gerry, you continue to attack, attack,
attack with your emotionally charged insults like "lunatic", "kook" and
"brazen liar".
The hateful thing on his site are YOUR words. So it is understandable
that you feel uncomfortable about them. I suggest you go back and read
everything you wrote to and about Gerry which is webbed on his site.
In fact, Gerry already stated his reasons for webbing your posts.
>All it says is that Armstrong's idiot hate page is an idiot hate page.
Your post says more than that, and you know it.
>I suppose the truth is hateful to people who hate the truth.
That's exactly why I told you that the hateful things on his site are
YOUR words. So it is understandable that you feel uncomfortable about
them. Read them.
>Here's one of the "hateful" posts you think it is justified to have put
>on a page falsely accusing people of being OSA, a lie you defend to the
>point of lying about it.
Wrong. I have not lied. In that post, there is no accusation of you being
an OSA. The post simply says "Yes, the long-awaited goOn SquAd follies are
Clearly, you are the liar, since you have stated a known falsehood. You
know you have stated a falsehood because we have been over this before,
yet you still continue to repeat your lie.
>This is, I believe, the very first of my posts that your lunatic buddy Gerry
>Armstrong put up on his idiot hate page out of insane revenge for me having
>dared to call his idiot hate page an idiot hate page.
Rob, I think Gerry is saner than you. Your posts seem to demonstrate that
you are consumed with a hatred for Gerry. And I think Zinj is right. You
seem to have adopted Diane's methods of "debate". After all, I think you
yourself said something to the effect that she is a formidable opponent.
>Where's the "hate" in this post? Or were you just lying?
The hate was in your followup post in which you said:
"So in other words, if you lie and act like a fucking kook, it's "doing
OSA's work" not to just smile and pretend it isn't happening?
"Sorry. That kind of kook logic doesn't work in the real world. The only
thing in common between all those people is that they've disagreed with
you. Only to a cult mentality does that justify calling them OSA. It's
disappointing you think that lying about and dead-agenting people for
disagreeing with you is appropriate.
"The one acting like OSA here is you."
I note that you did not grant me the courtesy of responding to my earlier
questions, yet you asked me your questions while ignoring mine. This is
one of the reasons why I have said you seem more interested in insisting
you are right than you are in achieving some sort of understanding. This
is yet another way that ~YOU~ act like an OSA goon. And if you have ever
tried to have a conversation with a diehard OSA staff member, you know
what I am talking about, which is that OSAs make accusations, sling insults
designed to provoke a reaction, ask loaded, irrational questions, and fail
to answer. *That* is how YOU act like an OSA goon.
In article <8qjo5vsbm3tb04amr...@4ax.com>, ptsc says...
>
>We've already gone through this and your blatant lies about it repeatedly.
I have not lied. And if we've already been through this, why did you
bring it up again in response to my post which was a response to Scarff's
post? Could it be that you are unable to resist posting hateful remarks?
>You choose to pretend that the blinking "OSA" doesn't mean anything, like
>some kind of brainwashed zombie.
No. You chose to mischaracterize my opinion when you stated that blinking
letters don't mean anything to me. You do this sort of thing repeatedly.
Why?
>Then the <title> tag was changed to
>"Gerry Armstrong--Posts by a.r.s. participants who claim to not be formally
>employed OSA staff or formally operated OSA agents but who, in and with
>pretended stupidity, forward OSA's purposes by attacking the Scientology
>cult's fair game victims."
I know. You don't have to tell me.
>It was previously "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops."
I know. You don't have to tell me.
>If there was nothing wrong with it, then why did he sneakily change it
>without ever retracting it?
I never said there was nothing wrong with it.
Do you know why Gerry changed the title of the page?
I note your use of the word "sneakily -- as if he could change the title
without anyone noticing. Geez.
>Describing people as "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops" so clearly
>is an accusation of being OSA (or otherwise a Scientology agent) that it
>would take a true moron to pretend otherwise.
Surely you do not think I have described you as "Scientology's Usenet
Black PR and Ops". Only a confused person would think so.
Warrior
I think you know very little about what kind of person Gerry is.
>rather than being duped by him, since he was kind enough to put me on
>his nutty hate page
There is no hate, only his responses to those who in his opinion act like
hateful OSA goons.
>and accuse me of being OSA
You can say it a hundred or a thousand times, but your lie that he accused
you of being OSA will never be any less true than it has always been.
Warrior
>
>A plonk on both your houses!!
Thank you. :)
ptsc
>>and accuse me of being OSA
>You can say it a hundred or a thousand times, but your lie that he accused
>you of being OSA will never be any less true than it has always been.
Please explain what "Scientology's Usenet Black PR and Ops" could
possibly refer to.
Actually, on second thought, don't. Just fuck off.
Bye.
Tanya Durni
act like OSA. I wouldn't have thought that you act like OSA except for
your display here on ARS. I have read letters that were generated by
OSA, in response to me posting on this newsgroup and I am sorry if this
stings, but you respond very similarly when you can't control the situation.
I realize acting like OSA, doesn't mean you are OSA, always have.
However, this newsgroup is an effective way to communicate with OSA. Hi
OSA, hope you are having a grand day. I am.
Thaddeus Beier
You know, this is really funny. Announcing the addition to a kill
file with a "plonk" is childish at best, but announcing it through
an anonymous remailer really takes the biscuit. Congratulations,
whoever you are.
thad
BarbaraSchwarz
> In article <kn3a5vcj6vpll41eq...@4ax.com>, ptsc says...
> >
> >I also don't dump women and then mock them over the suicide of their
> >husband, as that dirty fucker Gerry Armstrong has done.
>
> His words regarding the heads of the hydra in fact referred to the
> corporate octopus known as Scientology. Gerry explained this back
> on April 11, 2002 in his post "Re: CLamelon Challenge No. 3 (or is
> that 4?)".
>
>
> http://warrior.xenu.ca
I know what must happened with Gerry. After I posted that the
documents that Gerry Armstrong stole from the Scientology orgs are
forgeries, that they are not L. Ron Hubbard's and that him taking the
documents was blessed by those Scientology infiltrators that forged
the documents, he went into hiding. Gerry knows that those docs were
not L. Ron Hubbard's and the legal actions by the C of S to get those
documents back should just make them authentic. This action should
fool everyone to believe that the outrageous documents are really
those of L. Ron Hubbard, otherwise the church would not act this way
and would make such a big deal out of those papers.
Gerry Armstrong's documents about L. Ron Hubbard are absolutely false
and absolutely worthless. If I would be still on staff in the orgs, I
would let him those and tell Gerry to wipe his behind with those. They
are the work of criminal non-Scientologists and have nothing to do
with LRH or his life. Gerry knows that and that is why he decided to
rather go into hiding. Isn't that right, Gerry?
Barbara Schwarz
cty9...@centurytel.net
On par with your lawyer gig.
ptsc
>I don't thing Gerry Armstrong is the first or the last to think that you
>act like OSA.
*plonk*
Mark Bunker
Hey, I have been accused of being sent to California to spy on Tory
Christman. Now, who was that making the accusation, again? Oh, yes.
You and Shirley.
So the difference between a "nutty hate page" and a "nutty hate post"
is what?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Why was Bunker sent to California? Why is he buddy-buddy
with Tory now, who welcomes ex-Scientologists into her circle?"
--- Shirley Jean Wilson builds more conspiracies
"When you attend those parties of Tory's, how much gossip
do you send back OSA's way via Stacy and Bob? Is that why
they paid to send you there in the first place, Bunker?
You're as good as an OSA plant, you slithering creep"
--- ptsc expands upon the conspiracy
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zinj
mbunk...@charter.net says...
> On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 04:25:05 GMT, ptsc <pt...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> >On 25 Feb 2003 20:01:52 -0800, Warrior <war...@xenu.ca> wrote:
> >
> >>In article <575016bf.03022...@posting.google.com>, Garry
> >>Scarff, using the identity of StacyBro...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >>>
> >>>You are a liar and a well-known fan of the dirty fucker, Gerry
> >>>Armstrong.
> >>
> >>I'm thankful for having a friend like Gerry.
> >
> >I'm thankful to know what kind of person he truly is, rather than being duped
> >by him, since he was kind enough to put me on his nutty hate page and accuse
> >me of being OSA for having the temerity to criticize the lunacy of having a hate
> >page calling people OSA in the first place. It's nice to know a fascist enemy
> >rather than have a snake-in-the-grass fake ally.
>
> Hey, I have been accused of being sent to California to spy on Tory
> Christman. Now, who was that making the accusation, again? Oh, yes.
> You and Shirley.
>
> So the difference between a "nutty hate page" and a "nutty hate post"
> is what?
>
I'd reiterate how silly it seems to whine about being 'called OSA', while
so profligately attaching the same label hin and yon, but hey, you have
to have some sympathy with poor petey. Gerry hasn't actually *posted* in
quite a while, and despite Tigger's industrius BobSpotting, neither Bob
nor Stacy is around to serve as targets either. A pretty sad state of
affairs when one is forced to use you and Gerry and other 'proxies' as
'stand in enemies', lest the gall and bitterness silently suppurate.
Of course, when petey's not busy posting his own anonymously cowardly
posts, I guess he could join Tigger in discovering Bob, or maybe Diane
would be willing to share Tom with him.
Zinj
--
Scientology is the *Cure* for escalating Health Care Costs
'We didn't think it was a big deal'
'She died! People die! - David Miscavige
Dave Bird
writes:
>In article <plpo5vcoi1iunubg4...@4ax.com>, ptsc says...
>>
>>You really are going out of your way to be stupid, aren't you.
>
>No, I am not.
You were headed that way anyway, so it was no extra trouble?
>
>>What's hateful about this post, which is on the idiot hate page you
>>slobber all over yourself defending?
>
>What's hateful is *you*
Let me help you out. Rob is not the person who has written
screaming idiocy about Rob being OSA. Gerry is the person
who has written screaming idiocy about Rob being OSA.
I liked Gerry, and still like him, but his current actions
are completely out to lunch.
-- . . : : ,; . : ' ___.
uno, dos, tres, |FUEGO| .:. .:. .:': :' .:':' :. . : (") #oH|
' ' :' : :' : .::. H_ ~~~|
< > __ ,;;,. \\::// R_) |
'-|"""(") {__}::===== ....'''' ' ' ' ___..\||/....L\. ...|
____||--|_'--/__\___ '' .--''':::::::::::::::::::::
\ / /////////////S.Coronado/////
;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^
LRonHubbard is shelled byGoats inHell.READ http://www.ronthewarhero.org