RVY Re: LRH Letter to GO
wgert
wri...@eskimo.com (Robert Vaughn Young) wrote:
>I can verify this dispatch from L. Ron Hubbard. It was considered quite
>secret at the time. It is important for a number of reasons. Historically,
>it predates the Snow White program and actually starts to set it up. The
>first actual SW dispatch was, I believe, Aug/Sept 72.
>blah-blah, blu-blu, dah-dah ...
In case you haven't noticed, Graham Berry, Vaughn Young and
Lawrence Wollersheim have all taken to either arguing FACTNet's
case on this newsgroup over the past two weeks, or providing some
sort of a public relations spin on their argument that it was OK
for FACTNet to copy the Church's copyrighted works because, they
really don't own them; despite the findings in every other
copyright case that the works are owned by Church related
corporations. They fail to post the papers which have been filed
by RTC or BPI and only try and show their own arguments to try and
sway the usenet public.
In the case of Vaughn Young, who is a paid witness and PR
consultant for FACTNet, he has taken to reliving his "glory days"
in the GO. His autobiographical account reveals how he and the
people he was working with in the GO royally screwed things up
causing the Sea Org to finally have to take over and disband the GO.
By mistake, oversight or luck, Young ended up in another public
relations position, for the first time outside of the GO, and was an
abysmal failure and earned himself a couple of trips to the RPF (he
should have been dismissed from staff altogether but wasn't).
I find it interesting that Young never achieved any sort of an
acceptable job performance standard outside of the GO and after a
number of failed projects, he realized he wasn't hacking it and he
left. The Sea Org was not the GO and the Sea Org expected its
people to be competent. Now of course Young portrays everything in
a "sour grapes" way.
Nearly anyone who knows him will tell you that Lawrence was
in trouble almost the whole time while just being a public
Scientologist as he continually ran various con schemes and shady
business deals and tried to involve unsuspecting Scientologists in
them. He created continual conflicts with other members of the Church
because he screwed them over in some business deal - having nothing to
do with taking courses or receiving auditing in the Church.
As to Berry, his client list tells it all. Nothing explains his
behavior better.
wgert
Read the Rogues Gallery of ARS Bigots web site
www.dancris.com/~rshaw
Mark Ricciardi
Face it. This ridiculous scam created by LRH, a demented man, to make
money, is a home for idiots and sots. You can be helped, but until you
want help, you are foolish. His E-meters and tech are nothing but tricks
known to psychiatrists for ages. You've been fooled and maybe you love it,
but face it, you are foolish. Get control of your life. Wrestle back
yourself esteem. Take freaking charge man! You only get ONE shot at this!
wgert <wg...@loop.com> wrote in article
<5upiub$4u4$1...@usenet89.supernews.com>...
Paul
> >secret at the time. It is important for a number of reasons. Historically,
> >it predates the Snow White program and actually starts to set it up. The
> >first actual SW dispatch was, I believe, Aug/Sept 72.
>
> >blah-blah, blu-blu, dah-dah ...
>
> In case you haven't noticed, Graham Berry, Vaughn Young and
> Lawrence Wollersheim have all taken to either arguing FACTNet's
As wgert so eloquently puts it: blah-blah, blu-blu, dah-dah ...
In case you haven't noticed, wgert completely fails to address the
substance of Mr. Young's posting and of the posting that Mr. Young was
responding to. The dispatch is so damaging to Mr. Hubbard's reputation
and the reputation of the Church of Scientology[tm] that wgert is trying
desperate to attract attention away from it by attacking Mr. Young (and
others). This is a well-known tactic of dealing with criticism that the
Church of Scientology[tm] employs.
So, wgert, what did you think of the dispatch that was posted? Do you
agree with Mr. Young that it was indeed from L. Ron Hubbard? Did it
(and does it) represent the views of Hubbard and of the Church of
Scientology[tm]?
-Paul
Paul
wgert wrote:
> In case you haven't noticed, Graham Berry, Vaughn Young and
> Lawrence Wollersheim have all taken to either arguing FACTNet's
> sort of a public relations spin on their argument that it was OK
> for FACTNet to copy the Church's copyrighted works because, they
> really don't own them; despite the findings in every other
> copyright case that the works are owned by Church related
> corporations.
Of course, wgert fails to mention the new evidence that has come to
light recently casting a great deal of doubt on the ownership of these
documents. In particular, the last days of L. Ron Hubbard, having come
under much closer scrutiny than before, are particularly interesting.
In case you haven't noticed, wgert, this issue will be decided in the
courts, not in this newsgroup. The judges in the various cases have all
agreed that the question of copyrights of these documents is one that
definitely needs to be re-opened. It appears that the "spin" is enough
to convince the judges that the matter is worth investigating.
Obviously, the final decision has yet to be made, but the jury's still
out on this one.
> They fail to post the papers which have been filed
> by RTC or BPI and only try and show their own arguments to try and
> sway the usenet public.
This is because they know that paid agents like yourself are perfectly
capable of posting the information favorable to the Church of
Scientology[tm] and providing your own public relations spin--just as
you did in this letter.
Naturally, you, following the dictates of the Church of Scientology[tm]
and its founder, have chosen to attack the people who are in litigation
with you rather than attack their arguments. You have also, for the
same reason, failed to provide your own arguments--because you have been
told to "always attack; never defend." It's a shame, of course, but
that is your choice.
I note, for the record, that you failed to provide the arguments used by
MoFo, Berry, et. al. Is there some sinister reason you didn't do this?
Or is it just because you wanted to present your side of the case, just
as did Berry, Young, and Wollersheim? Do you believe that those three
men are obligated to provide your side of the case?
> In the case of Vaughn Young, who is a paid witness and PR
> consultant for FACTNet, he has taken to reliving his "glory days"
> in the GO. His autobiographical account reveals how he and the
> people he was working with in the GO royally screwed things up
> causing the Sea Org to finally have to take over and disband the GO.
What wgert fails to note, of course, is that it was Operation Snow White
that caused the "disbanding" of the GO. This was an operation,
authorized by L. Ron Hubbard, and run by the GO, to infiltrate
government offices with the aim of stealing information and placing
false information. They were ultimately caught and raided by the
FBI--something that had absolutely nothing to do with Vaughn Young and
"the people he was working with."
What wgert also fails to note is that the GO was never actually
disbanded. The organization simply tossed a few people to the wolves,
renamed itself, and continued as before.
[snip]
> The Sea Org was not the GO and the Sea Org expected its
> people to be competent.
Following this logic, it appears that wgert is saying that he would have
preferred that the GO should have been more successful in Operation Snow
White--i.e., that they would completed it and not gotten caught.
Note that he never actually reveals anything about Operation Snow White
or about Hubbard's role in it. It somehow all becomes Vaughn Young's
fault. This is another tactic employed by the Church of
Scientology[tm].
One question to ask yourself: what kind of religion routinely employs
such tactics as these?
-Paul
Warrior
wgert wrote:
> The Sea Org was not the GO and the Sea Org expected its
> people to be competent.
Hah! You failed to mention that many GO staff were also Sea Org
members too. Being in the Guardian Office did not preclude one
from being a Sea Org member. In fact I was appointed to the GO,
and I was a Sea Org member.
Heber Jentzsch, Kendrick Moxon, Dick Weigand and a whole bunch
of current OSA staff were formerly members of the GO. No argument
from me about their (in)competency though! :-)
Warrior
Neal Hamel
On Fri, 05 Sep 1997 18:42:31 GMT, wg...@loop.com (wgert) wrote:
>
>I find it interesting that Young never achieved any sort of an
>acceptable job performance standard outside of the GO and after a
>number of failed projects, he realized he wasn't hacking it and he
>left. The Sea Org was not the GO and the Sea Org expected its
>people to be competent. Now of course Young portrays everything in
>a "sour grapes" way.
Gertie,
What I cannot figure out is that if Vaughn is so inept, why is OSA so
scared of him? Whenever Vaughn pops up one or more OSA directed
putzes, such as yourself, immediately being blasting away at him with
lies.
-Neal H.
William Barwell
In article <5upiub$4u4$1...@usenet89.supernews.com>, wgert <wg...@loop.com> wrote:
>wri...@eskimo.com (Robert Vaughn Young) wrote:
>
>>I can verify this dispatch from L. Ron Hubbard. It was considered quite
>>secret at the time. It is important for a number of reasons. Historically,
>>it predates the Snow White program and actually starts to set it up. The
>>first actual SW dispatch was, I believe, Aug/Sept 72.
>
>>blah-blah, blu-blu, dah-dah ...
>
>Lawrence Wollersheim have all taken to either arguing FACTNet's
>case on this newsgroup over the past two weeks, or providing some
>sort of a public relations spin on their argument that it was OK
>for FACTNet to copy the Church's copyrighted works because, they
>really don't own them;
An dif the cult doesn't own 'em because that fuckin' Jerk Dm gets caught
having forged Hubbard's will?
HAR! HAR! HAR!
Graham certainly stirred up the shit birds when he filed to reopen
probate, didn't he, you lil buttwipe!
And, ya know, it still won't put Xenu and BTs and Clusters,
and incident II back into the bag.
Nobody wants to read your hate filled agitprop.
They want more silly space opera!
Recently, we learned that the vaunted OTVIII is just warmed over old OTIV.
For that you idiot clams pay tens of thousands of dollars.
Snigger!
And yer lil buddies DM and Rinder are now being sued for $190 million for
libel in a whole other case not involving RVY, Wollie or Erlich!
Snort! Har!
Better get some more credit cards, Gertie. DM will need
you to max 'em out for lots of expensive courses so he can pay off his
legal bills.
Ohhhh, the Reges will evetually be force to crank it out and shake
the last pfennig from your pantaloons to keep the whole shit-mess afloat.
tell us about Xeeeennnnuuuuuuuuuuuuuu! Tell us about Xenu, Gertie, and
how he made them bad, bad BTs you will pay tens of thousands to process
out before you can be allowed the privledge to pay tens of thousands of
dollars to take OTVIII (old OTIV warmed over by the way).
Buy them course now before the price jumps drastically, Gertie, you
pathetic, ignorant meter monkey!
Snigger, Xenu! Xenu! Can everybody here shout XENU!
Louder, I can't here you!
Louder, so Gertie can hear it!
Snort!
You a funny clam, Gertie!
Pope Charles
SubGenius Pope Of Houston
Slack!