William Barwell, another individual on the run......
Spacetraveler
http://groups.google.se/groups?hl=sv&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=41094f5d%240%2417094%24811e409b%40news.mylinuxisp.com&rnum=8
He says there:
"You are so predictable. You never do your home work.
Check Armstrong's website for the RV Young testimony about doctoring
copyrigts.
Check for the testimony of two experts that the Hubbard signatures on
documents transfering copyrights were not Hubbard's signatures. You
are so predictable. You refuse to look.
You want me to spoon feed you, but any fact I point out to you is
ignored. I am not going to waste my time hunting this all down for you
so you can ignore the facts and thus, waste immense amounts of my
time. Its all on the net if you want fcats and put for the slightest
effort. Its old news to most long time critics, so you aren't winning
hearts or minds by failing to do your homework."
Another recent example of his ignorance and evasions you find here:
http://groups.google.se/groups?hl=sv&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=41094bb4%240%2417091%24811e409b%40news.mylinuxisp.com&rnum=4
It can be seen here that he is totally ignoring to respond to my exact
questions. (offered again later in this post) It appears to be a
general behaviour of people when confronted with their lack of
knowledge or incongruities exposed in their reasoning that they resort
to these kind of evasions. Gerry Armstrong does that (as clearly
shown), William Barwell is another one. Who is next on the list to be
exposed?
The remainder of my communication to Barwell that he intends to
ignore:
You say that the copyrights for the transferral to RTC have been
forged. You also say Hubbard was in control at that time. Why then
needed these documents to be forged? You only have to old man about
it!
Explanation? (this will be interesting)
> >> Forged Hubbard's signature too.
> >> Took control of all the copyrights, and set up RTC to
> >> handle the legal details, make sure copyrights were up
> >> to date and gave himself healthy bonuses for sales
> >> of Hubbard's crap through his connections with RTC and ASI.
> >
> > Interesting. Earlier you spoke about that L. Ron Hubbard was fully in
> > control during the years he was 'missing' (1980-86). And now you claim
> > that Miscavige had to forge his signature. Why would he have to do
> > that if in fact he was in full control?
>
> It did not matter. Hubbard set things up early on so he got 10%
> of all Scientology profits. Including book sales. His copyrights gave him
> the leverage to do that.
Wrong, wrong, wrong, you are DEAD WRONG about that. It DOES matter to
the utmost! It makes that your stories contain incongruities.
If the old man is still there to do these things, if he is in fact in
control, forgering his signatures does not make any sense at all. It
is even dangerous, as someone could find out. You logic is completely
missing here.
> >> > LRH ED 284 was writen 1976 I believe. An LRH ED is ónly valid during a
> >> > period of one year. Did you know about that? Thought so.
> >> >
> >>
> >> The prices stayed high and nobody else set 'em but Hubbard.
> >>
> >> I have the 83 price lists.
> >
> > Did you not say that Miscavige forged his signature? Why did he have
> > to do that? Tell all of us that? Why, as you say L. Ron Hubbard was
> > in control, HE (L. Ron Hubbard) set the prices?
>
> To transfer control of copyrights to RTC. Becuse Miscavige had
> resurrected RTC and made it his power base. Because controlling
> the copyrights meant he controlled the orgs and missions who had
> to satisfy RTC dictats to keep rights to use CoS copyright materials.
> Also to keep the large numbers of old material that had improperly been
> copy righted recopyright, illegitimately, but but nobody challeneged that
> until Erlich's trial.
>
> And to streamline the movement of money from orgs to Hubbard
> utilizing the claims of owed past payments for use of copyright
> material. This also made legal challenges by mission holders
> harder.
With other words L. Ron Hubbard was not in control. Did you not say
that L. Ron Hubbard was in control?
Incongruities again.
> Really, its all there. Just do your homework.
>
> > Confused?
>
> Not in the least.
I think you are. Incongruities you know.
> >> Total to OT 7? $131,742 to $ 161.643
> >> - 10% service completeion awards. If you did that right and didn't
> >> get shafted.
> >>
> >> Who set these prices? Again, Hubbard. I've seen the HCOB
> >> where he rationalized the high prices based on average wages.
> >
> > HCOPLs It's all HCOPLs. http://www.ronsorg.nl/prices/prices.htm
> >
>
> I have the price list right here.
> And the HCOPLs mandating these various 'bridges'.
I don't care about some price list you have. You have to find out if
these pricelists are following the rules as listed at that link I
gave you!
Who was not doing his homework again?
> >> > I like especially the excellent referencing of Miller. "Interview
> >> > Mayo", Interview Eltringham".
> >>
> >> Why should I bother with your opinion rather than their eyewitness
> >> testimony?
> >
> > Face the fact that Miller is rather difficult to back up with his
> > rather inexact referencing. How are we to verify?
>
> He did his homework. Chris Owens has his notes, interviews and other
> materials used for the book. It checks out.
> All you have is armwaving, rhetorical questions with a loaded agenda
> and similar nonsense.
I don't care about that someone has his notes. The referencing of
Miller is very poor and hardly verifiable! Face that fact!
Chapter Twenty-One
1. Affidavit of Anne Rosenblum
2. Interview Dincalci
3. Lamont, Stewart, Religion Inc, London, 1986
4. Affidavits of Adelle & Ernest Hartwell St Petersburg Times, 9 Jan
1980
5. Interview Douglas
6. Interview Armstrong
7. Interview Urquhart
8. Interview Mayo
9. Interview Walters
10. John Atack archives
The above I regard pretty poor referencing. Face it!
>
> We also have in some cases, such as Hana Eltringham/Whitfield,
> later declarations under oath that support the interviews she gave
> Miller.
May be so. It may not account for all. It is difficult to verify
Miller. If you are certain you don't do like he did.
Spacetraveler
wbarwell
> Check:
>
>
> You say that the copyrights for the transferral to RTC have been
> forged. You also say Hubbard was in control at that time. Why then
> needed these documents to be forged? You only have to old man about
> it!
> Explanation? (this will be interesting)
>
And because by setting up RTC and transfering copyright
control to RTC and then to the family Trust B, when Hubbard
kicked the bucket Miscavige controlled the copyrights, hence
the cult. But for many years, Hubbard controlled the copyrights.
Not DM.
Duhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
And Hubard didn't care in the last yeras as long as vast sums of
money kept coming his way by weekly deliveries of suitcases of
$100 bills gouged out of the orgs by the "Finance Police"
I am not going to dig all of this out, arrange it and
spoon feed it to you at great expense of time and effort
for a man who doesn't really want to know any of this
and isn't going to think, You will go into instant
Scientology apologist mode. You'll accept nothing outside of
your preconceptions.
It most certainly doesn'y pay me to waste time with you.
Yeah, Hubbard resigned from Scientology and
had nothing doing with running the cult.
Not.
Hubbard had nothing to do with setting up GO, writing
up Snow White, and its intel training hat check sheets,
and setting up his own wife to over see it all.
Not.
And Hubbard gave up his copyrights in 1958 and in lieu
of those took 10% of all income from all orgs.
Not. He later demanded, and got, immense sums of
money from CoS claiming they owed him royalties
dating back to 1958 on said copyrights.
You are a man who does not like facts.
And then you invite me to waste time digging all
this up in its tedious and time consuming minutea
so you can blow it off and waste my time for nothing.
Its all documented.
You wste YOUR time digging it out, or keep babbling
wrongheaded stuff everybody else here knows.
Curious newbies can download the books read them
and google websites for declarations and other details.
But, me waste more time with you who will never accept
anything no matter how much evidence and testimony
there is for it all? A fool's errand!
No thanks.
You lose.
Cheerful Charlie
--
Senator Waxman's searchable database of iraq war lies.
www.house.gov/reform/min/features/iraq_on_the_record/
A good portal to more lies and Bush stupidity is to be found at
www.failureisimpossible.com - Go to the index and go to
"L" for lies. All you need to know about Bush when you
step into the voting booth. Bush is a liar and surrounds
himself with fellow liars.
Cheerful Charlie
Spacetraveler
> Spacetraveler wrote:
>
> > Check:
> >
> >
> > You say that the copyrights for the transferral to RTC have been
> > forged. You also say Hubbard was in control at that time. Why then
> > needed these documents to be forged? You only have to old man about
> > it!
> > Explanation? (this will be interesting)
> >
>
> And because by setting up RTC and transfering copyright
> control to RTC and then to the family Trust B, when Hubbard
> kicked the bucket Miscavige controlled the copyrights, hence
> the cult. But for many years, Hubbard controlled the copyrights.
> Not DM.
> Duhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
>
> And Hubard didn't care in the last yeras as long as vast sums of
> money kept coming his way by weekly deliveries of suitcases of
> $100 bills gouged out of the orgs by the "Finance Police"
>
> I am not going to dig all of this out, arrange it and
> spoon feed it to you at great expense of time and effort
> for a man who doesn't really want to know any of this
> and isn't going to think, You will go into instant
> Scientology apologist mode. You'll accept nothing outside of
> your preconceptions.
> It most certainly doesn'y pay me to waste time with you.
Evasion noted. If you claim something you do the research! Also
evasion noted for not responding to the remainder of my exact
questions.
<snip rambling>
Spacetraveler
AGAIN THE FOLLOWING IS IGNORED!!!!!!!!!!!
Virginia McClaughry
Great question.
> > >>
> > >> It did not matter. Hubbard set things up early on so he got 10%
> > >> of all Scientology profits. Including book sales. His copyrights
gave
> > >> him the leverage to do that.
> > >
> > > Wrong, wrong, wrong, you are DEAD WRONG about that. It DOES matter to
> > > the utmost! It makes that your stories contain incongruities.
> > >
> > > If the old man is still there to do these things, if he is in fact in
> > > control, forgering his signatures does not make any sense at all. It
> > > is even dangerous, as someone could find out. You logic is completely
> > > missing here.
That's again, an intentionally generated outpoint that this guy (Barwell?)
is forwarding.
Means there's a situation, of course.
Do you support Ron's Org Netherlands?
There's just as many outpoints there as here on ARS, just from a different
"angle".
Mixing truth in to intentionally "bait" the outpoint desired to be taken in,
is still an outpoint in itself.
Edwin, who runs that site, has essentially refused to replace the altered
CBR transcripts he is promoting on that site, with the correctly done (by
the HASI) ones.
And they ARE altered. And not just "grammar and punctuation" or whatever BS
explanation Edwin had on that.
Take a look for yourself.
http://www.ronsorgusa.org/index.php?page=sigalterationstech4
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> I have the price list right here.
> > >> And the HCOPLs mandating these various 'bridges'.
> > >
> > > I don't care about some price list you have. You have to find out if
> > > these pricelists are following the rules as listed at that link I
> > > gave you!
> > >
> > > Who was not doing his homework again?
> > >
> > >
> > >> >> > I like especially the excellent referencing of Miller.
"Interview
> > >> >> > Mayo", Interview Eltringham".
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Why should I bother with your opinion rather than their eyewitness
> > >> >> testimony?
> > >> >
> > >> > Face the fact that Miller is rather difficult to back up with his
> > >> > rather inexact referencing. How are we to verify?
> > >>
> > >> He did his homework. Chris Owens has his notes, interviews and other
> > >> materials used for the book. It checks out.
> > >> All you have is armwaving, rhetorical questions with a loaded agenda
> > >> and similar nonsense.
> > >
> > > I don't care about that someone has his notes. The referencing of
> > > Miller is very poor and hardly verifiable! Face that fact!
I'd tend to agree with you on that - which is one of the things that will be
addressed when the www.scientologyintegrity.org site gets overhauled and
updated.
> > >
> > > Chapter Twenty-One
> > > 1. Affidavit of Anne Rosenblum
> > > 2. Interview Dincalci
> > > 3. Lamont, Stewart, Religion Inc, London, 1986
> > > 4. Affidavits of Adelle & Ernest Hartwell St Petersburg Times, 9 Jan
> > > 1980
> > > 5. Interview Douglas
> > > 6. Interview Armstrong
> > > 7. Interview Urquhart
> > > 8. Interview Mayo
> > > 9. Interview Walters
> > > 10. John Atack archives
> > >
> > > The above I regard pretty poor referencing. Face it!
Yeah, I'd say for actual truthfulness (full truth) they are poor
referencing - but for illogic they are great referencing. They show someone
(who can see) how the "spin game" is done, and they also show what repeated
outpoints are intentionally used in some cases point quite well to what is
the actual truth.
Virginia
wbarwell
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Spacetraveler <spacetra...@hotmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
> Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2004 7:21 AM
> Subject: Re: William Barwell, why he won't argue with those who don't do
> facts
>
>
>> wbarwell <wbar...@munnnged.mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
> news:<410a319b$0$17094$811e...@news.mylinuxisp.com>...
>> > Spacetraveler wrote:
>> >
**********
> in
>> > >> > control during the years he was 'missing' (1980-86). And now you
> claim
>> > >> > that Miscavige had to forge his signature. Why would he have to
>> > >> > do that if in fact he was in full control?
>
> Great question.
Because.
1. Future power grab.
When Hubbard kicked off, somebody would end up with running
Scientology. Controlling RTC which controlled the copyrights
was the best way. No copyrighted material, no tech, no courses.
The copyrights were a central choke point.
But as long as Hubbard lived, it changed nothing. The courses
at flag and advanced orgs went on as usual, the materials did not change,
life went on as usual.
2. Copyright problems. Nobody had really been in charge of overall,
keeping the coopyrights up to date, and nobody was in charge of
enforcing them. RTC became the guardian of these things with
a budget and a mandate to keep these things legally guarded.
3. Lawsuits. Taking copyrights away from CSC, CST and other entities
and setting them aside in seperate legal entity where that entity did
not deal with processing PCs or such that generated lawsuits made
the ownership of copyrights safe and much more judgment proof.
See the Kolt decision in regards to ownership of NOTs for why this
sort of setup was necessary. If David Mayo created NOTs as a work for
hire for CSC, CSC owned NOTs. It CSC lost its case with Wollersheim,
and had conveyed all real property and cash out of CSC, Wollersheim
might get NOTs, and license them out to AOs at his pleasure to recover
money CoS owed him. Placing all copyrights and trade marks in
a central organization seperate from CoS entities that generated
lawsuits made legal sense.
Hubbard was in hiding and left these sort of problems for others
to deal with. DM dealt with them,and did so in a self serving manner.
But as far as Hubbard was concerned, nothing changed.
The courses were taught, Flag collected its 'donations', Hubbard
got his suitcases of $100 bills and stayed one step ahead of the law.
At that point, that is all Hubbard wanted to know about any of this.
Only after his death did solid control of RTC, its captive board,
and its control of the copyrights did it matter as now DM controlled the
tech materials and could cut off any org that bucked his control
from having rights to these materials.
It was one of several parallel lines of control DM held.
Its simple enough.
But nothing changed. The materials up to Hubbard's death were not
altered, changed, they were used as designed by AOs and other
COS entities. Nobody added new ones, or dropped old ones.
In this regard, DM did not screw Hubbard, Hubbard was in control
in that his 'tech' went on being used as per design, and Hubard got the
money he demanded.
It was mere adminstrative detail as far as that was concerned.
DM was dealing from the bottom of the deck only in regards to future
control of the copyrights after Hubbard's death. Then he could assume
defacto control by controlling RTC.
Its that simple.
>> > >>
>> > >> It did not matter. Hubbard set things up early on so he got 10%
>> > >> of all Scientology profits. Including book sales. His copyrights
> gave
>> > >> him the leverage to do that.
>> > >
>> > > Wrong, wrong, wrong, you are DEAD WRONG about that. It DOES matter to
>> > > the utmost! It makes that your stories contain incongruities.
Right, right, right. Hubbard saw the bottom line figures and could do the
math. 10% of a tangible figure was a good deal, rather than metering
each copyright to get the most $ out of it.
It was simply easier. And it worked.
Later he'd create more courses, and expensive ones.
10% was a real good deal.
Later he'd renege on the original deal and demand back pay
on arbitrarily backdated use of matrials at arbitrary rates.
>> > > If the old man is still there to do these things, if he is in fact in
>> > > control, forgering his signatures does not make any sense at all. It
>> > > is even dangerous, as someone could find out. You logic is completely
>> > > missing here.
>
> That's again, an intentionally generated outpoint that this guy (Barwell?)
> is forwarding.
>
> Means there's a situation, of course.
It all makes perfect sense. If you get the facts arranged in your mind
and think about it all.
Hubbard was on the run leaving others to deal with the
problems left behind.
The got dealt with.
Hubbard's materials went on being used as before.
The money went to Hubbard as demanded.
What else is there to understand?
Early on, Hubbard cut a deal, 10% of CoS profits
and he assigned COS his copyrights.
Later he reneged on thsi and demanded and got
money for claims past use of coprights.
Whats to understand?
He claimed to have given up control of copyrights but in
fact later claimedcontrol of said copyrights and charged
backdated licensing fees.
To do that, as far as CoS was concerned, he had control
of said copyrights.
There was no one with guts to sue Hubbard for
unilaterally abandoning his deal with COS, copyrights for 10%
What's to understand?
Its simple.
Who controlled the copy rights, COS or Hubbard?
Hubbard.
>> > >
>> > >> >> > LRH ED 284 was writen 1976 I believe. An LRH ED is ónly valid
> during
>> > >> >> > a period of one year. Did you know about that? Thought so.
>> > >> >> >
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> The prices stayed high and nobody else set 'em but Hubbard.
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> I have the 83 price lists.
>
> Do you support Ron's Org Netherlands?
>
> There's just as many outpoints there as here on ARS, just from a different
> "angle".
>
> Mixing truth in to intentionally "bait" the outpoint desired to be taken
> in, is still an outpoint in itself.
>
> Edwin, who runs that site, has essentially refused to replace the altered
> CBR transcripts he is promoting on that site, with the correctly done (by
> the HASI) ones.
>
> And they ARE altered. And not just "grammar and punctuation" or whatever
> BS explanation Edwin had on that.
>
> Take a look for yourself.
From us critic's points of view, its not a big issue.
Up to Hubbard's death, there were no big changes.
And basically, the changes now aren't going to
change whether a person doing this stuff become
OT or not in the least.
Its a seperate issue as to what happened in Hubbard's last
days with RTC and the changes that occured after
Hubbard was dead and gone and DM tried to get
the Golden Age of Tech to work where the old
style OT stuff was not working.
Hubbard couldn't get it to work as advertised, DM
can't either.
And is sending auditors fleeing from Flag.
>
> http://www.ronsorgusa.org/index.php?page=sigalterationstech4
>
>
>
> Yeah, I'd say for actual truthfulness (full truth) they are poor
> referencing - but for illogic they are great referencing. They show
> someone (who can see) how the "spin game" is done, and they also show what
> repeated outpoints are intentionally used in some cases point quite well
> to what is the actual truth.
They give their experiences and they were there.
Space Travleor has his agenda, his opinion, and was not there where as
these other people were.
Spin?
Traveler whirls so fast it makes me dizzy.
Miller's careful work stands. Travelor's clueless spinning
with its hagiographical bias is nonsense.
Brushing of eyewitness reports as mere opinion is the lowest and
most unacceptable spin, opinion there is.
You are the guys doing the spinning, you have a very
obvious agenda.
True beleivers are always the least trustworthy judges.
Hubbard was god and never did anything wrong and
it was all these evil people what did it.
Sorry, peoople, not buying that simple minded
agenda laden nonsense.
Virginia McClaughry
Like David Griffin said repeatedly to one of the government disinformation
posting identities ("CL" I believe) re: the copyrights.
"You lost them."
And...LRH arranged that through people he could trust.
Lenske showed up TOO LATE to stop it as the wheels were already in motion.
Speaking for myself here, of course, it's called Truth. Your agenda is just
as obvious. We all know who we are and which side of the fence we are on -
that was never in question.
> True beleivers are always the least trustworthy judges.
Your spin of "true believers" aside.....- We shall see who wins what.
They do not ask for whom the bell tolls - they know it tolls for them - LRH.
>
> Hubbard was god and never did anything wrong and
> it was all these evil people what did it.
> Sorry, peoople, not buying that simple minded
> agenda laden nonsense.
Who said he was "god" - I thought Ron more said he was "Lucifer".
Now THAT's funny.
LOL
Virginia
wbarwell
>
> wbarwell <wbar...@munnnged.mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
> news:41100c00$0$170$811e...@news.mylinuxisp.com...
>> Virginia McClaughry wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: Spacetraveler <spacetra...@hotmail.com>
>> > Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
>> > Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2004 7:21 AM
>> > Subject: Re: William Barwell, why he won't argue with those who don't
>> > do facts
>> >
>> >
>> >> wbarwell <wbar...@munnnged.mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
>> > news:<410a319b$0$17094$811e...@news.mylinuxisp.com>...
>> >> > Spacetraveler wrote:
>> >> >
>>
>> **********
>>
>
> Like David Griffin said repeatedly to one of the government disinformation
> posting identities ("CL" I believe) re: the copyrights.
>
> "You lost them."
>
> And...LRH arranged that through people he could trust.
Mary Sue Hubbard lost them. But to the day he died,
the materials Hubbard wrote, for the courses he designed,
were delivered as designed, and fees (donations) collected
as designed. Hubbard got his money, as demanded, nothing
changed as long as he lived. Nothing changed despite DM
little shenanigans which really only made big changes in control
of copyrights after Hubbard died.
Hubbard's designed system ran as designed to the day he died.
Courses were taught Hubbard recieved immense sums of money.
............
>>
>> Spin?
>>
>> Traveler whirls so fast it makes me dizzy.
>> Miller's careful work stands. Travelor's clueless spinning
>> with its hagiographical bias is nonsense.
>>
>> Brushing of eyewitness reports as mere opinion is the lowest and
>> most unacceptable spin, opinion there is.
>>
>> You are the guys doing the spinning, you have a very
>> obvious agenda.
>
> Speaking for myself here, of course, it's called Truth. Your agenda is
> just as obvious. We all know who we are and which side of the fence we are
> on - that was never in question.
Truth? What's true for you is true I guess. Hubbard was great at
undermining the very concept of truth.
Many ex-Sceintologists have no real concept of truth any more.
Its all spin.
So ST makes cutting remarks about Miller and all those who Miller
interviewed are swept aside, Space Traveler assumes only his
opinion counts.
No. Those who were there and witnessed it and told their
eyewitness stories have better opinions, the truth. Mere
spin artists with agendas like ST who were not there don't
count at all whenthey start this spin and apologism game
with cutting and dismissive remarks as substitute for
substantative argument and facts.
The agendas are obvious here. Deflecting criticism of Hubbard
and those Scientologists who signed on to his mad schemes,
the GOWW, Snow White et al.
We look at "What's true is what is true for you" Scientology
nonsense and can be dismissive of those bitten by the Scientology
bug. Truth, like ethics, has been redefined.
My agenda is manifold. It has numerous facets. Pointing out
how Hubbard mangled the very concepts of truth, facts, ethics
and he was not speaking the same language as non-Scientologists
when he used these words.
And we critics must be aware that others may not be speaking
of truth and facst as we understand the concept either.
The agenda of the true beleivers is to absolve Scientology and
Hubbard of all blame for anything bad that happened over 50
years despite a long paper trail and a long history of bad behavior.
The problem is, by not as-issing the facts, this allows the current
church to keep on doing the same thing.
The only rule really is, don't get caught.
>> True beleivers are always the least trustworthy judges.
>
> Your spin of "true believers" aside.....- We shall see who wins what.
"What's true is what's true for you".
- LRH
Welcome to wonderland.
>> Hubbard was god and never did anything wrong and
>> it was all these evil people what did it.
>> Sorry, peoople, not buying that simple minded
>> agenda laden nonsense.
>
> Who said he was "god" - I thought Ron more said he was "Lucifer".
>
> Now THAT's funny.
A lot of people vociferously deny Hubbard had anything to
do with fair game, GOWW, and that it was those bad old
infitrators that done it.
LOL. Space Traveler seems intensely resistant to
seeing Hubbard and Mary Sue were the nexus of
all this fair gaming that went on undr GO auspices.
And a panicky Hubbard later set up a massive operation
to burn all evidence linking him to any and all illegal
activities.
And action that removes any obligation to give Hubbard
any benefits of any doubts.
And it fair game has not been truely, openly, and
with full sincerity, been cancelled. The 1991
OSA check sheets show us the current church's
real attitude. Its policy, just don't get caught and
don't flaunt it in the public's face.