Disconnection, Lies and Video Tape
LawrieW
The originals of the videos that my daughters, Astra and Zoe, and I made for
the LMT are now with Scientology. This makes me want to puke.
These videos detail the horror that my two daughters were put through by
Scientology when they were members of the Sea Organization.
The price that they have paid for their honesty, and their desire to warn
others to avoid the unbelievable lies, manipulation and abuse they were
subjected to, is that they are now victims of the single most evil aspect of
Scientology, their policy of disconnection.
Disconnection means that if you are a Scientologist who is connected to
someone who is critical of Scientology, has ever attacked Scientology, in a
newspaper, online or just verbally in some way, then you must never see or
speak to that person again, or you will be disconnected from. It doesn't
matter if this person is your child, spouse or friend. If you don't
disconnect, you will be disconnected from. This is all as per the written
policies of L. Ron Hubbard.
They are permanently disconnected from their mother Leslie Woodcraft (watched
Lisa Mcpherson, when she was being held against her will in Clearwater),
grandmother Daphne Farrow (in the Sea Org. at Flag and 80 years old so they
will never see her alive again, or even know when she dies), brother Matthew
Woodcraft (in the S.O. in LA).
In better days, Bob and Stacy invited us to speak at the Leo J Ryan
conference in Cleveland. I was staggered to discover that every cult
discussed, operates the policy of disconnection. The Moonies, Hari Krishna,
all of them. It is the basic element of control for these cults, as it homes
in on RAW HUMAN EMOTION. There is nothing more important than family, for
most normal people. Their WHOLE life is shaped by caring for their family.
That here in the USA, Scientology is allow to operate its pathetic policy of
disconnection to control and manipulate, is a DISGRACE. That it is recognized
as a religion is a pathetic disgrace.
Anyway, on mother's day my two daughter's were in a funk. They know that they
will never talk to their Mother, Grandmother or Brother again, they don't
even know how to contact them. They haven't seen them in nearly two years,
since the proverbial hit the fan. When they tried to call them at the Sea
Organizations where they work, their calls were not forwarded. They have long
since given up any attempt at getting through, as a waste of time.
Their last meeting with their mother was in LA in 2000. Janet Weiland (OSA
operative) showed up. They were trying to stop Astra doing the article for
the San Francisco Times. Janet Weiland made a pathetic statement that she was
trying to prevent the family from being broken up. We all got into a shouting
match at The House of Pies (a restaurant close to their complex) in LA.
Leslie promised Astra and Zoe that she would never disconnect from them and
her granddaughter Kate (now aged 3). Soon after, OSA must have realized that
we were in contact with the LMT. Leslie vanished from LA and Astra and Zoe
have never heard from her since
Their "crimes" are to have agreed to make the videos with the LMT, and a
couple of newspaper articles. Basically, they told the truth about their
gruesome experiences with the "Church." I can tell you that the effect on them
is devastating. Get them counseling, I hear you say. That will help, for
sure, but the fact must be faced, that they will never ever speak to Leslie,
Daphne and Matthew again, and that is devastating. In reality they are in
grieving mode, as their family members are now in effect DEAD. And how do
Leslie, Daphne and Matthew feel. They are being so totally controlled by the
Cult, who knows?
This emotion devastation is for what? If your country is at war or there are
terrorist attacks, sacrifices have to be made. But this disconnection policy
is being used to further a BULLSHIT SCIENCE FICTION CULT whose highest
intellectual achievement is their claim that we are all possessed by dead
space aliens.
Tigger
Thank you for posting the current situation with your family. Perhaps
someday things may change. I hope so......but it's probably not likely.
At least your daughters have a father who is still a father. Your love
and support must mean a great deal to them.
You must be very proud of your daughters. Their courage to speak out
and reach out was admirable and it was not in vain......it helped
others and someday, if not now, I think they will see that it helped
them too. Hopefully someone was able to mirror the LMT site including
the videos. If you have a copy, you might want to send it to someone
who can put it up on their website. Of course, if that video is the
property of the LMT and it is now owned by Scientology, the "church"
would probably drag out their "copyrights" bundle of dirty tricks.
Hopefully that won't happen, but I have learned it is always best to
expect the worst when it has to do with the Church of Scientology.
Good Luck and God Bless all of you,
Tigger
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Date: Thu, Jun 13, 2002, 4:25am (CDT+5) From: law...@aol.com (LawrieW)
ptsc
>From LawrieW (Lawrence Woodcraft)
>The originals of the videos that my daughters, Astra and Zoe, and I made for
>the LMT are now with Scientology. This makes me want to puke.
I like this post, but one minor correction--the tapes are currently with the
court in Clearwater. Of course Scientology will do whatever they can to
make sure they do end up with the tapes, but they don't have them yet.
This section of the transcript concerns those tapes and what's going on
with them.
8 MR. McGOWAN: I just wanted to clarify
9 something on the record and explain to the Court
10 where we're coming from on this.
11 We understand -- obviously, because the tapes
12 were delivered so late in the game and we are trying
13 to rectify problems that have happened, Mr. Bunker
14 is flying down here -- Mr. Bunker certainly asserts
15 all of the privileges he has asserted. He can
16 physically look at these tapes, I'm told, play them
17 himself, and sort out what he's willing to give up
18 and what he wants to maintain the privilege on under
19 Mr. Keane's supervision, if that is agreeable to the
20 Court.
21 THE COURT: It is not agreeable to the Court.
22 I don't know what he wants to keep -- whether what
23 he wants to keep is something that should be turned
24 over, quite frankly.
25 MR. McGOWAN: I agree.
1640
1 THE COURT: So I'm not interested in what it is
2 he wants to do, and I'm not interested in what
3 either of the parties want. What I'm interested in
4 determining is if the parties are given what it is
5 that is relevant to this case, and they are going to
6 be given that whether Mr. Bunker wants it to be
7 given or not.
8 MR. McGOWAN: Absolutely. And I'm not
9 suggesting Mr. Bunker would adjudicate that issue.
10 But it may be that he knows at least what he thinks
11 is privileged. It may or may not be. He certainly
12 may --
13 THE COURT: He certainly wouldn't know what is
14 privileged. He wouldn't know what is privileged.
15 So, I mean, all I want Mr. Bunker to do, if he's
16 willing to sit down and say -- I heard, for example,
17 true or not, he would know, but I heard Mr. Merrett
18 say there were tapes in there he made of his family.
19 MR. McGOWAN: Uh-huh.
20 THE COURT: All I need is to see, "This is a
21 tape of my family." That clearly is something that
22 he would give back to him, nobody would have an
23 interest in or anything of the sort.
24 If he were to say, "This tape is --" I don't
25 know, I could go on and on with examples, "I think
1641
1 this tape is privileged because it doesn't have
2 anything to do with this case," well, I wouldn't be
3 interested in what he thinks.
4 MR. McGOWAN: Yes. You would need to watch the
5 tape.
6 THE COURT: Yes. I just want him to say what
7 is on the tape. If he says, "This is a tape of
8 Mr. Dandar talking to Dell Liebreich and I think
9 that that is something that should be turned over,"
10 well, I frankly wouldn't care. No, it couldn't.
11 That would probably be privileged.
12 MR. McGOWAN: Right.
13 THE COURT: Maybe not. If he were --
14 MR. McGOWAN: I see what you mean.
15 THE COURT: In other words, I don't want him
16 making this decision. Mr. Keane certainly isn't in
17 a position where he's aware of all of the
18 intricacies of what we've been going through here
19 where he might not think something was relevant, I
20 might think it was --
21 MR. McGOWAN: Absolutely.
22 THE COURT: -- because it might involve some
23 case in California, some witness in California. I
24 might say I think that is relevant and I want it
25 turned over.
1642
1 So what -- what -- on the other hand, it may be
2 something that he doesn't care a thing about, that
3 he's perfectly willing to turn over, that I may say
4 this really doesn't have anything to do with this
5 case and, consequently, it's not relevant.
6 Therefore, it's not to be turned over, and I'll give
7 it back to him.
8 Now, if it's his, once I make this decision, I
9 could care less what he does with them. I just --
10 as guardian of these tapes, I'm the one who told
11 Mr. Merrett to go get them and deliver them to
12 court, and I'm the one that told you to deliver them
13 to the Court.
14 They are in my possession. I have turned them
15 over to Mr. Keane, and I'm going to make an initial
16 decision, after Mr. Keane does whatever it is he's
17 supposed to do, as to what tapes get turned over and
18 what tapes don't.
19 MR. McGOWAN: I guess then the guidance I'm
20 looking for, for Mr. Bunker, is if he comes down
21 here, is he able to watch the tapes and at least say
22 this is tape number one, it contains the following
23 things, one, two, three, four, five.
24 THE COURT: I don't even care what it contains,
25 just people.
1643
1 MR. McGOWAN: People, conversations --
2 THE COURT: Conversations, or obviously if it
3 has -- if this has to do with the Lisa McPherson --
4 this is a discussion about the Lisa McPherson case.
5 MR. McGOWAN: Right.
6 THE COURT: Something like that.
7 MR. McGOWAN: Right. Okay. I just --
8 THE COURT: And if I'm in doubt, after I see
9 whatever law he puts together, then I may say I want
10 to see that myself. If I'm not in doubt, then I'll
11 say turn these over, don't turn these over.
12 MR. McGOWAN: That is fine. I just wanted to
13 make sure everybody is on the same page.
14 THE COURT: Isn't that kind of what I said this
15 morning?
16 MR. MOXON: I think so.
17 MR. McGOWAN: That is fine.
18 THE COURT: And that tape -- or that little
19 brief whatever it is that he makes up, is to come to
20 me initially. Obviously, that is something that
21 most likely will be something that is given to
22 either side after I make my decision so that they
23 can see if they would want to say, "I don't agree
24 with this and can you look at this one further" or
25 something like this.
1644
1 MR. McGOWAN: You mean the actual physical tape
2 itself?
3 THE COURT: I mean the little blip. In other
4 words, the little blip is to come to me initially.
5 MR. McGOWAN: Okay.
6 THE COURT: All right?
7 MR. McGOWAN: Very good. Thank you.
8 THE COURT: Thank you.
9 Continue.
10 MR. DANDAR: Okay.
11 THE COURT: And the long and short of it is I
12 really don't want to hear any more about these. I
13 don't want to hear from somebody coming in here
14 saying this was private, and it's turned over, and I
15 don't want to see lawsuits coming out of it. I
16 don't want to hear much more about it, frankly. If
17 it has something to do with this, fine. If it
18 doesn't, I don't want to hear about it.
Starshadow
LawrieW wrote:
I so grieve for all of you. And I'm sorry that the
people you trusted turned on you this way, too, vis a vis
those tapes now in CofS hands.
Maybe one day Leslie and Matthew will wake up and leave.
I dn't hold out much hope for Daphne--at her age, she'd
have a hard time getting out, even if she wanted to. I'm
sorry this is so. I know how much it hurt when my older
daughter and I had an argument (her instigation, now
healed) and my first granddaughter was unknown to me. I
ached on mother's day. I fell apart when my sister-in-law
gave "Grandma" mugs to her mother. It wasn't any cult
thing, and it got better. This cult disconnection thing
may be forever, and won't, so I can imagine that kind of
pain and it hurts me to do so.
If Zoe or Astra would like to email me ( I have
grandchildren Kate's age) I'd be glad to correspond with
them and lend a shoulder, albeit long distance. I am
Wiccan clergy and I do not betray confidences--I know this
is what Minton and Co. told you, too, but you can ask
Tory, for one, whether in her experience this is true.
I wish I could enfold you in a hug. It might help for a
few minutes, at least.
---
Bright Blessings,
Starshadow, KoX, SP5, Official Wiccan Chaplain ARSCC(wdne)
"Scientology in 1986, after fraud judgement in favor
of ex-member Lawrence Wollersheim --'Not one thin dime for
Wollersheim'
Scientology May 9, 2002 before final appeal--
86,746,430 Thin Dimes for Wollersheim." www.factnet.org
www.xenu.net --what the Church of Scientology doesn't want
you to see
Mark Bunker
This is the type of comment that makes me question why I bother. Who
says anyone "turned" on Lawrence, Zoe and Astra? Outside of PTSC,
Tigger and Deanna, who says the tapes are in Scientology's hands?
They aren't. They are in the court's hands.
I'm growing very weary of all of this. There must be people who can
do this better than I can.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"As for credibility, mine disappeared a long time ago..."
---- Tigger
"In fact, I suspect (hell, I KNOW) Mark is being used as a tool by Scientology..."
---- Deana M. Holmes
-----------------------------------------------------------
mir...@sonic.net
>
> This is the type of comment that makes me question why I bother. Who
> says anyone "turned" on Lawrence, Zoe and Astra? Outside of PTSC,
> Tigger and Deanna, who says the tapes are in Scientology's hands?
> They aren't. They are in the court's hands.
With the expectation that they will eventually be turned over to Scientology
as part of LMT business. Please don't be disingenuous about this Mark, we're
not stupid people that you can try to hoodwink.
Mirele
mir...@sonic.net
Magoo
they do, IMHO. Especially for young people. As I've posted before, I know 4
young people who took their lives and the one common denominator was
Scientology and threat of disconnection for each one.
Scientology "justifies" it because a few other religions have something
called "Shunning". I cannot speak for any other group...but I *Can* and Will
speak about my experiences in Scientology.
To me, Disconnection should be made illegal. These are children who cannot
even see their mother! This is a brother who cannot speak to his sisters,
and visa-versa. Scientology *is* playing God when they enforce this. God
gave this mother these children, and Scientology has NO right to take them
away. (Of course Scientology will say, "No we are not...she choses to not
speak to them". Sure...just like she "chose" to watch Lisa McPherson Die?
COME ON!!! )
To the Woodcrafts, I send my love. I just called them and Astra
sounded a lot better than I thought she'd sound. She's strong,
and all 3 are doing very well. That does not take away from these abuses
Scientology has inflicted on their entire family.
So far I've been in of some key people to Scientology. Of course they
((Scientology)) doesn't really care about religion or they wouldn't pull the
hateful things they do. Attempting Black PR in of some of the Key LA
Ecumenical Council had to be one of their top moves against themselves.
OSA is to be thanked for demonstrating
their absolutely evil and abusive side, each time.
(( and yes, that goes to all the "Volunteers" too~as that IS your group, and
thus you are part of the same fools that upset people
daily, whether you can face that or not!))
The world, and especially Religions (even ones who are not, but are called
such) should and need to be helping bring about Peace, compassion and the
helping of each other. As long as Scientology is busy breaking families
apart, they will NEVER >>>>>>>>>>>EVER>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>EVER>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>make
the grade.
Read my lips: N E V E R. You are your worst enemies. I told you that
when I was in...and you prove it daily since I've left.
Tory/Magoo~!
X-Scientologist after 30 years
X-OT 7
X- Staff
X-Grad 4, HSSC, FPRD auditor
X- OSA Int Volunteer for 20 years
X- Scientology Minister
X- ED Scientology Parishioners League
X- OSA INT Secret Internet Mafia
X- True believer :)
Am now, for thinking and speaking my mind,
Declared SP and Expelled from C of S ((wooo hooo!!!))
SP 6^ with Cumulative Cluster and recently awarded
"The garland of Clusters for Outstanding Public Service"
Free at last!!
For more info, please read http://www.xenu.net
or http://www.xenutv.net
http://www.torymagoo.org
http://www.lermanet.com
http://www.lisatrust.net
"LawrieW" <law...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020613002509...@mb-fa.aol.com...
Magoo
My spell checker screwed up :)
It's supposed to say, in the 4th paragraph
"Infront of Some of they Key....."
It was changed to "in"...
Sorry.
T
"Magoo" <mag...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3d08...@news2.lightlink.com...
Keith
Have you ever considered that Mark Bunker is stupid and is being hoodwinked?
With apologies to Laserclam.
--
Best Regards,
Keith http://n6jpa.home.attbi.com/ Win32 Freeware & NW OR Radio Page
======================================================================
We been spending most our lives Living in an Amish paradise
We're just plain and simple guys Living in an Amish paradise
There's no time for sin and vice Living in an Amish paradise
We don't fight, we all play nice
======================================================================
Starshadow
Charlie
ptsc is correct that CoS does not have these videos or the disks with
the names of all who contacted LMT. No final deal with Bob Minton has
been made and I can tell you, having been in the courtroom when he
discussed this and witnessing, firsthand, the sincerity with which he
spoke, that Bob DOES NOT want to give this information to Scientology.
He well knows how painful and courageous it was for many who made
contact with LMT. Perhaps he will feel forced into the position to do
so before it's all over, but it's not something he wants. You all can
laugh or egg me off the board, but if I was a betting woman I'd put my
money on him drawing the line on handing over that information.
Starshadow
Charlie wrote:
I would have once bet money that Minton and Brooks would
never make any deals with the CofS. I'm not so trusting
any more.
Rev. Fredric L. Rice
>From LawrieW (Lawrence Woodcraft)
>The originals of the videos that my daughters, Astra and Zoe, and I made for
>the LMT are now with Scientology. This makes me want to puke.
It's likely that the criminal enterprise already downloaded the
video tapes from the Internet long ago -- as soon as they were
posted, I suspect. Did the criminal enterprise get coverage that
wasn't provided by the Trust?
>These videos detail the horror that my two daughters were put through by
>Scientology when they were members of the Sea Organization.
>The price that they have paid for their honesty, and their desire to warn
>others to avoid the unbelievable lies, manipulation and abuse they were
>subjected to, is that they are now victims of the single most evil aspect of
>Scientology, their policy of disconnection.
How horrible. There's a new web site going up that specifically
addresses the fascist, totalitarian policy of "disconnection," by
the way.
-- Insane nut rant at http://www.linkline.com/personal/frice
"Commodore Rimjob" is available at http://crimjob.tripod.com
Why did the Scientologist cross the road? - mimus
To slug Bob Minton. - Shydavid (See http://www.BobMinton.ORG/
Without Prozac, you would kill them all.
The Vine
> Scientology "justifies" it because a few other religions have something
> called "Shunning". I cannot speak for any other group...but I *Can* and Will
> speak about my experiences in Scientology.
>
> To me, Disconnection should be made illegal.
But what about freedom of religion? Freedom of association? If I do
not want to associate with someone because they are "entheta", then
that is my right. What exactly would you have the gov't do? Arrest me
for shunning someone?
> These are children who cannot
> even see their mother! This is a brother who cannot speak to his sisters,
> and visa-versa. Scientology *is* playing God when they enforce this. God
> gave this mother these children, and Scientology has NO right to take them
> away. (Of course Scientology will say, "No we are not...she choses to not
> speak to them". Sure...just like she "chose" to watch Lisa McPherson Die?
> COME ON!!! )
They can speak to them anytime they want. But they don't, because
they consider their religion more important than their family. Ok,
whatever. But Scientology is not guilty of any crime in this aspect.
The Church has a right to set guidelines for their followers. If one
of them is "If someone turns against the Church, you must avoid them",
then Oh Well.
Magoo
>
> ptsc is correct that CoS does not have these videos or the disks with
> the names of all who contacted LMT. No final deal with Bob Minton has
> been made and I can tell you, having been in the courtroom when he
> discussed this and witnessing, firsthand, the sincerity with which he
> spoke, that Bob DOES NOT want to give this information to Scientology.
> He well knows how painful and courageous it was for many who made
> contact with LMT. Perhaps he will feel forced into the position to do
> so before it's all over, but it's not something he wants. You all can
> laugh or egg me off the board, but if I was a betting woman I'd put my
> money on him drawing the line on handing over that information.
Thanks for this first hand insight, Charlie :)
Tory/Magoo!
roger gonnet
"LawrieW" <law...@aol.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
20020613002509...@mb-fa.aol.com...
> From LawrieW (Lawrence Woodcraft)
Thanks a lot, Lawrence. That's a great true post.
Say hello to your daughters.
roger
roger gonnet
"Mark Bunker" <lmtm...@yahoo.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
noqhgugkg4cghk8m6...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 13 Jun 2002 15:51:41 GMT, Starshadow
> <stars...@starshadow.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >>
> >
> >
> > I so grieve for all of you. And I'm sorry that the
> >people you trusted turned on you this way, too, vis a vis
> >those tapes now in CofS hands.
>
> This is the type of comment that makes me question why I bother. Who
> says anyone "turned" on Lawrence, Zoe and Astra? Outside of PTSC,
> Tigger and Deanna, who says the tapes are in Scientology's hands?
> They aren't. They are in the court's hands.
He can be wrong about that, Mark, but see? LMT has erased the website where
they were, .
This is like if scn had them.
(No reproach intended against you, Mark. You've been great during all the
time the trust was running in the truth)
roger
ptsc
>This is the type of comment that makes me question why I bother. Who
>says anyone "turned" on Lawrence, Zoe and Astra? Outside of PTSC,
>Tigger and Deanna, who says the tapes are in Scientology's hands?
>They aren't. They are in the court's hands.
In my response to the original post, I was very clear as to what exactly
had happened to the tapes. In fact, in the very thread you're responding
to, I corrected the original poster's statement that the tapes were in
Scientology's hands.
Don't let that stop you from lying, though.
On 13 Jun 2002 04:25:09 GMT, law...@aol.com (LawrieW) wrote:
>From LawrieW (Lawrence Woodcraft)
>The originals of the videos that my daughters, Astra and Zoe, and I made for
>the LMT are now with Scientology. This makes me want to puke.
I like this post, but one minor correction--the tapes are currently with the
1640
1641
1642
1643
1644
ptsc
Lulu Belle
> their absolutely evil and abusive side, each time.
I have to make a comment here.
OSA, in reality, is only a "middle management" level org. When you
look at the Sea Org management food chain, they actually aren't really
very high up there. Though they are responsible for executing a lot of
negative things, and are often directly run by very high-up people,
they themselves, in fact, don't have any more say in the making of
policy and the actual decisions of management than any normal
run-of-the-mill SO member does.
The OSA staff get worked to death, don't themselves get to see their
families, and, even though they have little actual power, get blamed
when things are not going well for the church on the legal and PR
front. The OSA staff have been put through many "ethics missions" and
other types of internal purges as a result of losing court cases, etc.
There is a policy in Scientology that says that "stats are internally
caused." What this means, for example, for an OSA staff member, is
that if the church loses a court battle it is considered to be the
fault of the staff whose job it is to prevent it. So it must be
because of something wrong or out-ethics that the OSA staff members
themselves are doing. Some type of a witch hunt usually follows. I
have no doubt the staff are bearing the brunt of the blame for having
to pay Wollersheim the 8.7 mil, regardless of whose "fault" or
decision it actually was. The whole org has probably been put into a
"lower condition," expected to work even more hours than usual, maybe
eating rice and beans.
They have it tough, believe me.
Ed
And as I have posted a few times before, OSA is very
undermanned and faced with ever more fires to put out. The hard core
leadership and staff in OSA have been in the cult for 15-30 years, and
it is almost impossible for younger, newer people to accumulate any
real responsibility. First, just as in the KGB or any intelligence
service, they are paranoid about being infiltrated; and second, anyone
coming into Scn since the DM era has little experience of the dream,
the myth, that keeps the old timers going. That is the hope of seeing
something good come from the benevolent use of auditing tech, as
opposed to what passes for tech now, which is largely sec checking,
ethics, and other forms of applied stress and intimidation. In the old
days LRH created a positive side, hopes and dreams of where the group
could go, and he created that roughly in balance with the simultaneous
tightening of the screws and all-pervasive control. Since DM there is
the negative side overwhelms the positive. New blood won't be coming
into OSA, ever.
Ed
Pts 2
Great post! As someone who has battled "disconnection" among family and
children in the courts for 10 years now, I feel for you and deeply
appreciate this message.
I also sympathize with the "trust" issues that abounds now with recent
events. WHO or WHAT can be trusted? :( I'm not convinced however that
the LMT tapes are in the hands of the Co$ ...at least yet. Certainly
it's a potential concern in the near future though.
What appeared promising to me, was the SP Times article yesterday where
this Judge Schaeffer is quoted as wanting to bring in the State's
attorney to investigate alleged criminal acts on "BOTH" sides. I would
love for the Florida authorities to stick their noses DEEP inside the
Co$....at the invitation (and Order) of a judge. I'm just hoping and
praying she has the courage to follow through.
Best,
Tom
<><><><><><><><><>
www.MadvilleLaw.Net
Magoo
"The Vine" <exo...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:6d68477c.02061...@posting.google.com...
> Hello Tory
>
> > Scientology "justifies" it because a few other religions have something
> > called "Shunning". I cannot speak for any other group...but I *Can* and
Will
> > speak about my experiences in Scientology.
> >
> > To me, Disconnection should be made illegal.
>
> But what about freedom of religion? Freedom of association? If I do
> not want to associate with someone because they are "entheta", then
> that is my right. What exactly would you have the gov't do? Arrest me
> for shunning someone?
Yup....if it entails your cult (and let's get one thing perfectly straight
here: if it walks like a cult, and it talks like a cult...which Scientology
does in SPADES..........it IS a Cult!) breaking up a family ...yes, I do
think
an arrest is the minimum that should be done.
>
> > These are children who cannot
> > even see their mother! This is a brother who cannot speak to his
sisters,
> > and visa-versa. Scientology *is* playing God when they enforce this. God
> > gave this mother these children, and Scientology has NO right to take
them
> > away. (Of course Scientology will say, "No we are not...she choses to
not
> > speak to them". Sure...just like she "chose" to watch Lisa McPherson
Die?
> > COME ON!!! )
>
> They can speak to them anytime they want.
Bullshit. You are a brain washed moron who doesn't in fact even know
what your group actually does. And ya know what? I'm not even going to tell
you. Find out yourself....or stay in your little comfort zone of "it's all
ok".
But they don't, because
> they consider their religion more important than their family.
SPLAT!!! Damn!~>>>>>>>>>>> There goes my computer screen
a g a i n !!!
Thank you very much for pointing that out, and making this statement very
clear. I think I'll add this quote
to my Web Site.
Ok,
> whatever.
No..........noooooooooooooo not "Whatever" at all. One of my friends
abandoned her 14 year old kids on the beach in Malibu to join the Sea Org.
What do you think of that? Sort a violates Way to Happiness, wouldn't ya
say? If you don't.....clear up your "MU's" or read the GD book!~
Secondly.................One of my friends cannot even find her son,
as your cute group won't tell her. You think that's OK? Find your
soul....you've sold it to some conns who are laughing at you, and you don't
even know it.
But Scientology is not guilty of any crime in this aspect.
BS. It is...........and one day it will either be cancelled, or against the
law.
Disconnection has NOTHING to do with religion, and EVERYTHING to do with
Control and abuse. It may take years....but you can count on one thing:
Scientology will kill itself before it cancels this, because if it
did.........no one would stay!
> The Church has a right to set guidelines for their followers.
ooooooops..first you have to *really* BE a church, and you all
blow that one daily.
If one
> of them is "If someone turns against the Church, you must avoid them",
> then Oh Well.
Oh well my ass! You glib moron. Go walk down L. Ron Hubbard way.
How old are you? Maybe you're young and think this is just the way things
are.........but the truth is, your group is killing itself, and you're
promoting the very things that are strengling it. Go ask people honestly:
WOULD YOU JOIN A GROUP IF YOU KNEW IF YOU LEFT, and
EVER SPOKE OUT>>>>>YOU WOULD LOSE ALLLLLLLL OF YOUR
FRIENDS? EVEN IF WE PROMISE YOU TOTAL FREEDOM?
Go ask them and come report your findings. I'll do the same and let's
compare notes. Are you up for it?
I didn't think so............but I will, just for the record. Check in a few
days. It'll say "Survey Results".
And for your own sake, will you PUlllllllllllllease wake the fuck up?
Study BOTH Sides...and then come talk. And try that survey, honestly.
Tory/Magoo!
X-Scientologist after 30 years
X-OT 7
X-Grad 4 auditor, HSSC, (Trained and interned at Flag), FPRD Auditor
X-OSA Volunteer for 20 years
X-OSA INT Secret Internet Mafia
X- OSA INT ED of Scientology Parishioners League
X- Scientology Minister
For thinking and speaking my mind, I'm now
Declared SP and Expelled from C of S (wooo hooooooo!)
SP 6 ^ with Cumulative Cluster
Free at last!!
For more info, please see:
http://www.xenu.net
http://www.lermanet.com
http://www.torymagoo.org
:)
Magoo
I understand,,,,I really do. I worked with OSA for 20 years as a volunteer,
and quite often with top exec's. However,,,,where ever they are on the
"Chain"........it takes PEOPLE to follow orders.
No matter who the jagg off is who wrote it, it takes people
saying "OK...I'll do it". I know, because I many times said,
"No...that's not right, I won't do that".
I knew these bozo's who came and did what they did...
and no matter WHO ordered it.......THEY DID IT>
From Gayle Carrol who was in the meeting, and promised
her group wouldn't harrass Dr. Kent and myself (and then they did right
after she left) to the OSA morons who passed out the black
PR on Dr. Kent..........each of them contributed to a seriously BAD
image each minister now has of their group.
Someone has to say, "ENOUGH!"
Until they do........I will be here thanking them for demonstrating the
very thing that I've been talking about. I prefer they'd change, but if they
won't.....and they do exactly what we've been talking about....I think a
"thank you OSA" is in line. That's all.
I'm sorry they're in lower conditions...........but they're only in them
because they chose to stay and do them. Someday they MAY say,
"FU>>>>>>>>>>NO. I'm DONE>>>>>" and that day, they will
be free.
Tory/Magoo!
"Lulu Belle" <exes...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7db3d0ad.02061...@posting.google.com...
Diane Richardson
wrote:
>
>"The Vine" <exo...@excite.com> wrote in message
>news:6d68477c.02061...@posting.google.com...
>> Hello Tory
>>
>> > Scientology "justifies" it because a few other religions have something
>> > called "Shunning". I cannot speak for any other group...but I *Can* and
>Will
>> > speak about my experiences in Scientology.
>> >
>> > To me, Disconnection should be made illegal.
>>
>> But what about freedom of religion? Freedom of association? If I do
>> not want to associate with someone because they are "entheta", then
>> that is my right. What exactly would you have the gov't do? Arrest me
>> for shunning someone?
>
>Yup....if it entails your cult (and let's get one thing perfectly straight
>here: if it walks like a cult, and it talks like a cult...which Scientology
>does in SPADES..........it IS a Cult!) breaking up a family ...yes, I do
>think
>an arrest is the minimum that should be done.
The CoS isn't the only group that practices disconnection ... although
most other groups refer to it as "shunning."
The Amish practice shunning, Tory. Do you believe Amish who
shun family members should be arrested and put in jail? Or do you
have an even worse punishment in store for them?
Diane Richardson
ref...@bway.net
Starshadow
Diane Richardson wrote:
Jehovah's Witlesses do it too. As do many other
cults/religions/groups.
Feisty
>
> The originals of the videos that my daughters, Astra and Zoe, and I made for
> the LMT are now with Scientology. This makes me want to puke.
>
> Scientology when they were members of the Sea Organization.
>
> The price that they have paid for their honesty, and their desire to warn
> others to avoid the unbelievable lies, manipulation and abuse they were
> subjected to, is that they are now victims of the single most evil aspect of
> Scientology, their policy of disconnection.
>
Your story has been shared by many. The day the stories came out, as did you and
your daughters, I gave many copies of your stories as the truth of what really goes
on to this day.
As open as the wounds seem to be, remember that your courage to be sending this
message today is what will have caused many others to reconcile to their own
feelings of the same. It is downright lousy that the rest of your family will not
follow now, much for the same pressures that you have spoken of.
I wish you much strength at this time, to keep hope and motivation to hopefully see
a better day. There was once an impossible time where you and your children seemed
never to change. But things changed. There is always the very same possibility that
it may happen for the rest of your family.
Feisty
>
>
>
Magoo
"Diane Richardson" <ref...@bway.net> wrote in message
news:3c424c2...@news.giganews.com...
Diane.
I cannot speak for the Amish just as really you cannot speak about
Disconnection. Why? Because you've never really experienced how
deep and deadly Scientology disconnection is.
I have spoken to people about "Shunning" and from my understanding
(which I admit is much less than Disconnection)......it is quite a bit less
severe. However, I have no intention of arguing this point with you.
Tory/Magoo!
I knew my opinion would be unpopular, esp with people such as yourself, who
is really just theorising about all of this anyways.
It's not a game, when you stand over dead people. At that point
the true abuse becomes crystal clear.
Tory/Magoo!
>
>
> Diane Richardson
> ref...@bway.net
>
Beverly Rice
> Diane Richardson wrote:
> > The CoS isn't the only group that practices disconnection ... although
> > most other groups refer to it as "shunning."
> > The Amish practice shunning, Tory. Do you believe Amish who
> > shun family members should be arrested and put in jail? Or do you
> > have an even worse punishment in store for them?
> Jehovah's Witlesses do it too. As do many other
> cults/religions/groups.
In The Way International, part of their justification, using
"The Word", of course, were verses such as II Cor. 6:14 -
"Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for
what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and
what communion hath light with darkness?"
And they would tell you, if your spiritual adversary can't
trip you up with enemies, he will use your friends and your
family to trip you up and keep you from getting what God
truly wants for you.
Therefore, it is best for you to break away from those
who would interfere with your walk with God, and if that
is your family, then they would have you see them as being
simply tools of the adversary to keep you from getting
closer with God.
Of course, with The Way International, just like with the
Co$ and other such sectarian and seperatist belief systems
that hold the ever elusive "Truth" . . .
being taken off your path of "spiritual growth" in reality
means breaking off connection from those who would question
you, or try to make you think, or challenge you.
It's so easy to stay trapped in anothers delusion when you
don't have to give serious thought or allow seepage of
questioning in to the mind set.
ARC = As-Ising the Real CST,
Beverly
Diane Richardson
wrote:
[snip]
>Diane.
>
>I cannot speak for the Amish just as really you cannot speak about
>Disconnection. Why? Because you've never really experienced how
>deep and deadly Scientology disconnection is.
Sorry, Tory, but that's scieno-think. There's no requirement anywhere
(except in Scientology) that people must experience something
first-hand before they can discuss it.
>I have spoken to people about "Shunning" and from my understanding
>(which I admit is much less than Disconnection)......it is quite a bit less
>severe. However, I have no intention of arguing this point with you.
The "people" you claim to have discussed shunning with are lying
to you, Tory. If you can imagine the impact of shunning on a person
brought up in a closed society, with little contact with the wider
world, perhaps you might develop enough empathy to realize shunning
among the Amish is far more damaging than disconnection among
Scientologists.
But you don't even want to consider that, do you?
>Tory/Magoo!
>
>I knew my opinion would be unpopular, esp with people such as yourself, who
>is really just theorising about all of this anyways.
I'm not "just theorizing" about anything, Tory.
>It's not a game, when you stand over dead people. At that point
>the true abuse becomes crystal clear.
No one is claiming it's a game. That's nothing more than a straw-man
you've built to avoid discussing a topic you've chosen to bring up
yourself.
You've stated that arrest isn't good enough for people who shun. What
punishment do you recommend?
Diane Richardson
ref...@bway.net
Tigger
(snip)
>It's not a game, when you stand over
> dead people. At that point the true
> abuse becomes crystal clear.
Ms Tory/Magoo:
So the OSA LYING GAME which Minton and Brooks are playing has become
crystal clear to you.......That's good. Perhaps you would like to
contact your "friends" Bob and Stacy and tell them to quit standing over
the dead body of Lisa McPhereson and playing OSA games?
Tigger
>Tory/Magoo!
**************************************
May 26, 2002
"Scientology is a huge bluff. The one thing it cannot withstand is the
truth, simply told."
Richard Ford
**************************************
September 13, 1999
"PLEASE KNOW THAT YOU CAN TRUST ME."
STACY BROOKS YOUNG BROOKS
Confessed LIAR ~ April 9, 2002
**************************************
Starshadow
Beverly Rice wrote:
Absolutely.
But shunning, disconnection, whatever it's called cannot
be made illegal because that would interfere in an
individual's right to choose. Of course it hurts, but is
the gov't going to somehow enforce that family members
spend time with one another? How exactly?
What about cases of disconnection involving abusive
parents, where the grown kids have little or nothing to do
with those parents, or where the parents themselves cut
off the kids simply and solely because the adult child
calls them on the abuse they did? What would be regualated
next?
Pts 2
Tory:
I agree. There is merit to this argument providing the individual
involved or effected is a minor. However, for those who have reached
the age of consent (18 in most states,) will not have a legal leg to
stand on.
Referen wrote: <snip> "Sorry, Tory, but that's Scieno think. There's no
requirement anywhere (except in Scientology) that people must experience
something first hand before they can discuss it."
Diane:
<buzzer sound> WRONG! YOU ARE the Weakest Link, please left the stage.
:-)
Seriously Diane, you are correct in one minor point whereby one does not
have to experience
something to "discuss" it. The clarifier there is that "discussing"
something does NOT = grasp of the subject. Obviously you missed Tory's
point here which was that of the element of empathy. In just the
opposite of your misinformed statement "(except in Scientology,)"
"empathy" is not a teaching, dogma, or belief in $cn. Tory is correct,
experiencing first hand the effects of "Disconnection" is devastating!
As is experiencing first hand the traumatic effects of other harmful
$cieno policy employment such as Fair Game, and Death by Litigation.
See: http://xenu.ca/court/kent-declaration.html
Take for example (physical) rape. I could discuss it, share my
opinions, render my disgust and disapproval, toss in some witty quips,
but I won't have the same perspective or understanding as the actual
rape victim. The same could be said about recovering drug addicts,
alcoholics, war vets, 9/11 victims, and other survivors that have been
legitimately traumatized by abuse.
IMO & first hand experience,
Tom
--------------------------
www.madvillelaw.net
P.S. Diane, have you ever experienced the concept of empathy? Your
answer could help you shed your usenet nick of Icepick.
Diane Richardson
wrote:
>Magoo wrote: <snip> "To me, Disconnection should be made illegal."
>
>Tory:
>I agree. There is merit to this argument providing the individual
>involved or effected is a minor. However, for those who have reached
>the age of consent (18 in most states,) will not have a legal leg to
>stand on.
You certainly have an odd way of concealing dialogue. I'm not sure
who wrote what above, particularly since Magoo and Tory are the
same person.
>Referen wrote: <snip> "Sorry, Tory, but that's Scieno think. There's no
>requirement anywhere (except in Scientology) that people must experience
>something first hand before they can discuss it."
>
>Diane:
><buzzer sound> WRONG! YOU ARE the Weakest Link, please left the stage.
>:-)
>
>Seriously Diane, you are correct in one minor point whereby one does not
>have to experience
>something to "discuss" it. The clarifier there is that "discussing"
>something does NOT = grasp of the subject.
Discussing something does not indicate whether one grasps the
subject or not. Who claimed otherwise?
>Obviously you missed Tory's
>point here which was that of the element of empathy.
No, the point Tory made, and which I challenged, was her
statement that people who disconnect should be arrested.
She believes disconnection should be made illegal, and I
disagree with her.
>In just the
>opposite of your misinformed statement "(except in Scientology,)"
>"empathy" is not a teaching, dogma, or belief in $cn.
I've never stated otherwise. Who do you believe is claiming that
Scientology teaches empathy? Or is this nothing more than an
elaborate string of straw men you're constructing?
>Tory is correct,
>experiencing first hand the effects of "Disconnection" is devastating!
I'm sure it very well could be. I do not believe, however, that one
must have first-hand experience with such devastating emotion in
order to be qualified to discuss disconnection.
>As is experiencing first hand the traumatic effects of other harmful
>$cieno policy employment such as Fair Game, and Death by Litigation.
>See: http://xenu.ca/court/kent-declaration.html
Stephen Kent has never experience disconnection first-hand, yet he's
more than qualified to speak about it. So much for your strawman.
>Take for example (physical) rape. I could discuss it, share my
>opinions, render my disgust and disapproval, toss in some witty quips,
>but I won't have the same perspective or understanding as the actual
>rape victim. The same could be said about recovering drug addicts,
>alcoholics, war vets, 9/11 victims, and other survivors that have been
>legitimately traumatized by abuse.
>
>IMO & first hand experience,
Neither Stephen Kent nor I are claiming that we share the emotions
of those who have experienced disconnection. We are, however,
more than qualified to discuss disconnection without having to
experience it for ourselves.
The same applies to your comment about rape above. Although I believe
you've never experienced rape yourself, you might very well be put in
the position of serving on a jury regarding rape. That doesn't mean
only people who have been raped are allowed to sit in judgment in
rape cases, anymore than forbidding Stephen Kent to discuss
disconnection until he himself experiences disconnection.
You've erected so many strawmen here you've left nothing of the
original subject left. It might be very, very important for you to
express your anger, rage, and loneliness at having family members
disconnect from you. That doesn't mean, however, that others
aren't allowed to discuss the topic because they haven't felt the
same emotions that you have.
If what I write upsets you so much, I'd suggest you avoid reading
my messages. I certainly don't want to cause you any more pain
than you've already experienced.
Diane Richardson
ref...@bway.net
JimDBB
>From: ref...@bway.net (Diane Richardson)
>Date: 6/15/02 7:08 AM Central
>>I have spoken to people about "Shunning" and from my understanding
>>(which I admit is much less than Disconnection)......it is quite a bit less
>>severe. However, I have no intention of arguing this point with you.
>The "people" you claim to have discussed shunning with are lying
>to you, Tory. If you can imagine the impact of shunning on a person
>brought up in a closed society, with little contact with the wider
>world, perhaps you might develop enough empathy to realize shunning
>among the Amish is far more damaging than disconnection
As much as I dislike it, I must agree with Diane here. But I will modify this
by saying that scientology disconnection can be as damaging as Amish shunning
and this would depend on the circumstances.
Jimdbb
Pts 2
Disagree you here guy. I don't think Diane is correct in this topic.
Diane:
You are one "frosty" babe. :) But I do give you credit, you are
consistent....to the extent of living up to your usenet behavior and
nick if the
"icepick."
Your ramblings about "straw men" transcends even goofy.
I am certain you have the intellectual understanding of "empathy," but
you demonstrate you have little or no human or moral grasp of the
concept....of being in some one else's shoes.
But none-the-less, thanks for your 2 cents. Oh question, the President
of your Fan Club, Michael Greenberg (aka U-mike,) how's he doing?
Tom
<><><><><><><><><>
www.MadvilleLaw.Net
Mehn O'Paws
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2002 10:06:29 -0400 (EDT), pt...@webtv.net (Pts 2)
> wrote:
>
> >Magoo wrote: <snip> "To me, Disconnection should be made illegal."
> >
> >Tory:
> >I agree. There is merit to this argument providing the individual
> >involved or effected is a minor. However, for those who have reached
> >the age of consent (18 in most states,) will not have a legal leg to
> >stand on.
>
> You certainly have an odd way of concealing dialogue. I'm not sure
> who wrote what above, particularly since Magoo and Tory are the
> same person.
>
> >Referen wrote: <snip> "Sorry, Tory, but that's Scieno think. There's no
> >requirement anywhere (except in Scientology) that people must experience
> >something first hand before they can discuss it."
> >
tom, why do you even bother with this cold lady. it's a waste of
time. she'll argue with anybody about anything and nothing just to
argue. and with no productive purpose are mending end result.
> >Diane:
> ><buzzer sound> WRONG! YOU ARE the Weakest Link, please left the stage.
> >:-)
> >
> >Seriously Diane, you are correct in one minor point whereby one does not
> >have to experience
> >something to "discuss" it. The clarifier there is that "discussing"
> >something does NOT = grasp of the subject.
>
> Discussing something does not indicate whether one grasps the
> subject or not. Who claimed otherwise?
>
> >Obviously you missed Tory's
> >point here which was that of the element of empathy.
>
> No, the point Tory made, and which I challenged, was her
> statement that people who disconnect should be >arrested.
that's a lie nobody said that.
> She believes disconnection should be made illegal, >and I
> disagree with her.
duuhhh! of course it can't be made illegal, unless of course minors
are effected by the cult's family severing policy.
> >In just the
> >opposite of your misinformed statement "(except in Scientology,)"
> >"empathy" is not a teaching, dogma, or belief in $cn.
>
> I've never stated otherwise. Who do you believe is claiming that
> Scientology teaches empathy? Or is this nothing more than an
> elaborate string of straw men you're constructing?
double talk giberish icepick. the cult is the most un-empathic group
of robots i've ever witnessed.
> >Tory is correct,
> >experiencing first hand the effects of >"Disconnection" is devastating!
of course magoo is correct here
> I'm sure it very well could be. I do not believe, however, that one
> must have first-hand experience with such devastating emotion in
> order to be qualified to discuss disconnection.
>
> >As is experiencing first hand the traumatic effects of other harmful
> >$cieno policy employment such as Fair Game, and Death by Litigation.
> >See: http://xenu.ca/court/kent-declaration.html
>
> Stephen Kent has never experience disconnection first-hand, yet he's
> more than qualified to speak about it. So much for >your strawman.
professor kent is made of straw? look how rediculous this woman
richardson is.
> >Take for example (physical) rape. I could discuss it, share my
> >opinions, render my disgust and disapproval, toss in some witty quips,
> >but I won't have the same perspective or understanding as the actual
> >rape victim. The same could be said about recovering drug addicts,
> >alcoholics, war vets, 9/11 victims, and other survivors that have been
> >legitimately traumatized by abuse.
> >
> >IMO & first hand experience,
>
> Neither Stephen Kent nor I are claiming that we share the emotions
> of those who have experienced disconnection. We are, however,
> more than qualified to discuss disconnection without having to
> experience it for ourselves.
>
> The same applies to your comment about rape above. Although I believe
> you've never experienced rape yourself, you might very well be put in
> the position of serving on a jury regarding rape. That doesn't mean
> only people who have been raped are allowed to sit in judgment in
> rape cases, anymore than forbidding Stephen Kent to discuss
> disconnection until he himself experiences disconnection.
>
> You've erected so many strawmen here you've left nothing of the
> original subject left. It might be very, very important for you to
> express your anger, rage, and loneliness at having family members
> disconnect from you. That doesn't mean, however, that others
> aren't allowed to discuss the topic because they haven't felt the
> same emotions that you have.
icepick is incapable of feeling parental emotions, she does't have any
children? is that true?
> If what I write upsets you so much, I'd suggest you avoid reading
> my messages. I certainly don't want to cause you any more pain
> than you've already experienced.
it's wedgie time for richardson imho ! :)
>
> Diane Richardson
> ref...@bway.net
M.O.
Diane Richardson
wrote:
>ref...@bway.net (Diane Richardson) wrote in message news:<3c42ff7b...@news.giganews.com>...
>> On Sat, 15 Jun 2002 10:06:29 -0400 (EDT), pt...@webtv.net (Pts 2)
>> wrote:
[snip[
>> No, the point Tory made, and which I challenged, was her
>> statement that people who disconnect should be >arrested.
>
>that's a lie nobody said that.
____________________
Tory Christman Bezazian Christman (aka Maggo) most certainly
did say exactly that. Since you're apparently incapable of
retaining anything longer than a few brief seconds, I quote
Ms. Christman's words exactly:
From: "Magoo" <mag...@worldnet.att.net>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Disconnection, Lies and Video Tape
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 14:54:39 -0700
Organization: Lightlink Internet
Lines: 118
Message-ID: <3d0a...@news2.lightlink.com>
Yup....if it entails your cult (and let's get one thing perfectly
straight here: if it walks like a cult, and it talks like a
cult...which Scientology does in SPADES..........it IS a Cult!)
breaking up a family ...yes, I do think
an arrest is the minimum that should be done.
______________________
Let's go over this one slowly, to make sure you have grasped
it fully.
I stated that Tory said people who disconnect should be
arrested.
You claim I lied.
Tory Christman Bezazian Christman stated "breaking up a
family ...yes, I do think an arrest is the minimum that should
be done."
Please explain to me what lie you see in what I wrote.
>> She believes disconnection should be made illegal, >and I
>> disagree with her.
No, she wrote quite clearly "breaking up a family ...yes, I do think
an arrest is the minimum that should be done."
>duuhhh! of course it can't be made illegal, unless of course minors
>are effected by the cult's family severing policy.
I made no comment on whether arresting those who break up
families should or should not be made illegal. I suggest your
problem is with Ms. Christman Bezazian Christman, not with me.
It was Ms. Christman who stated "breaking up a family
... yes, I do think an arrest is the minimum that should be done."
Perhaps you might with to take up your difference of opinion
with her.
>> >In just the
>> >opposite of your misinformed statement "(except in Scientology,)"
>> >"empathy" is not a teaching, dogma, or belief in $cn.
>>
>> I've never stated otherwise. Who do you believe is claiming that
>> Scientology teaches empathy? Or is this nothing more than an
>> elaborate string of straw men you're constructing?
>
>double talk giberish icepick. the cult is the most un-empathic group
>of robots i've ever witnessed.
And I have never disagreed with that opinion. Once again, I'm puzzled
as to why you would attack me when your problem is obviously with
the Church of Scientology.
>
>> >Tory is correct,
>> >experiencing first hand the effects of >"Disconnection" is devastating!
>
>of course magoo is correct here
>
>> I'm sure it very well could be. I do not believe, however, that one
>> must have first-hand experience with such devastating emotion in
>> order to be qualified to discuss disconnection.
>>
>> >As is experiencing first hand the traumatic effects of other harmful
>> >$cieno policy employment such as Fair Game, and Death by Litigation.
>> >See: http://xenu.ca/court/kent-declaration.html
>>
>> Stephen Kent has never experience disconnection first-hand, yet he's
>> more than qualified to speak about it. So much for >your strawman.
>
>professor kent is made of straw? look how rediculous this woman
>richardson is.
Not even close to how ridiculous someone who chooses to call him or
herself "Mehn O'Paws" looks. If you're unfamiliar with the concept
of erecting a straw man in a debate, you belong in a kiddy chat room,
not on a.r.s.
I have no children. Does that make me less than human in your eyes?
>> If what I write upsets you so much, I'd suggest you avoid reading
>> my messages. I certainly don't want to cause you any more pain
>> than you've already experienced.
>
>it's wedgie time for richardson imho ! :)
A person called "Mehn O'Paws" who writes with the insight and
perspicacity of a 6-year-old is someone I will henceforth ignore.
I didn't realize there were actually people even *more* immature than
Ms. Tory Christman Bezazian Christman. Now I know better.
Diane Richardson
ref...@bway.net
Diane Richardson
wrote:
>JimBB:
>Disagree you here guy. I don't think Diane is correct in this topic.
I'm still mystified at why you choose to forge statements under other
people's nicks. Do you think that's cute?
>Diane:
>You are one "frosty" babe. :) But I do give you credit, you are
>consistent....to the extent of living up to your usenet behavior and
>nick if the
>"icepick."
What you think of my behavior is absolutely of no interest to me.
>Your ramblings about "straw men" transcends even goofy.
Actually, it hit close enough to home that you chose to delete the
entire post you were answering. Rather than addressing the issue
I raised, you chose to divert discussion away from that issue and
turn it into something about your own personal experience. While
you may believe your own life is fascinating enough to demand
attention on this newsgroup, the rest of the world doesn't necessarily
agree with your opinion.
>I am certain you have the intellectual understanding of "empathy," but
>you demonstrate you have little or no human or moral grasp of the
>concept....of being in some one else's shoes.
Once again I repeat: I couldn't care less what your ignorant and
uninformed opinion of me is. You chose to write about yourself
and your opinion of me rather than discuss the issue at hand.
>But none-the-less, thanks for your 2 cents. Oh question, the President
>of your Fan Club, Michael Greenberg (aka U-mike,) how's he doing?
I have no idea who you are talking about. As I said, your knowledge
of me is both ignorant and uninformed.
Diane Richardson
ref...@bway.net
Mike O'Connor
ref...@bway.net (Diane Richardson) wrote:
> Tory Christman Bezazian Christman (aka Maggo)
Oh, oh, watch out Maggo. Based on the length of that name, Diane doesn't
like you very much.
--
LYING IS A SCIENTOLOGY SACRAMENT
ASK THEM ABOUT XENU
Mike O'Connor <http://www.leptonicsystems.com/>
Pts 2
your own life is fascinating enough to demand attention on the
newsgroup, the rest of the world doesn't necessarily agree with your
rather than discuss the issues at hand."
Oh Diane:
You're just being silly and chilly again! :) And you're delusional if
you think you are the spokesperson for the world. It appears you take
great pride in saying (typing) a lot words regardless of content,
factual basis, and sincerity.
The "issues at hand" Diane? What's that in your mind? I thought it was
what Lawrence Woodcraft established in starting this topic thread
"Disconnection. Lies, and Video Tape." I have fought "family
disconnection" in the courts for over 9 years now at great monetary and
emotional expense, and have won. To share that with this NG is not a
"demand" process as you assert. It's an archiving exchange. It's
discussing the issues at hand.
You used the terms "ignorant and uninformed"
twice in this preceding post of yours referring to me. By doing so, are
you wanting this NG to to believe that you are brilliant and highly
informed .....on the issues at hand? :)
Tom
<><><><><><><><><>
www.MadvilleLaw.Net
Pts 2
your own life is fascinating enough to demand attention on the
newsgroup, the rest of the world doesn't necessarily agree with your
Pts 2
your own life is fascinating enough to demand attention on the
newsgroup, the rest of the world doesn't necessarily agree with your
Tigger
Your posts are appearing twice and sometimes three times.....Call msntv.
Perhaps they can help you with your problem.
boobootigger!@webtv.net
Monica Pignotti
> Magoo wrote: <snip> "To me, Disconnection should be made illegal."
>
> Tory:
> I agree. There is merit to this argument providing the individual
> involved or effected is a minor. However, for those who have reached
> the age of consent (18 in most states,) will not have a legal leg to
> stand on.
There are already laws in existence that cover minors. A minor cannot
"disconnect" from a parent. The only way this could happen is under
unusual circumstances if the court grants a person to become an
emancipated minor or one parent wins a custody battle in court that
forbids one parent to see the child, but that would only be in cases
of extreme abuse. There's no way that "disconnection" could be made
illegal for an adult, at least not in a free society. Even if they
were, how could this be enforced? By throwing the adult in jail? By
locking the two up in the room together? I can't imagine anyone
wanting the government involved in that way in personal affairs.
Monica
ptsc
wrote:
Actually, there are cases in which the Scientology cult seems to think
that its disconnection policy trumps wog law. The most notorious
recent example is when Brian Haney was ordered to disconnect
from his wife or else Bryan Zwan would disconnect from him. They
seemed to think their cult's policies trumped ordinary contract law,
and bumped him out of DIGL on the eve of the IPO.
Of course they ended up having to settle out of court for tens of
millions of dollars.
ptsc
Michael Reuss
>> Starshadow <stars...@starshadow.net> wrote:
>>> Lawrence Woodcraft wrote:
>>> The originals of the videos that my daughters, Astra and Zoe, and I made for
>>> the LMT are now with Scientology. This makes me want to puke.
Hi Lawrence, this is an excellent post. It shows the moral corruption
and deceit at the heart of Scientology so clearly.
But I wanted to ask you to please try and see this tape issue in a
somewhat different light.
First, you are being somewhat inaccurate when you claim that Scientology
"has" the videotapes that Mark made of you and your daughters. The court
has them, and when the judge rules, the cult's lawyers will get copies
of any parts that are relevant to the Lisa McPherson case. This should
be very little of the overall content, and extremely little or none of
the interviews with you, Zoe, and Astra. Once the cult's lawyers receive
their copies, they will have them to use in court (if appropriate,
according to the judge) but they will not become owners of the pictures
and video content. The copyrights to the video content will still be
Mark's property, and so he can continue to distribute those videos
showing the story of your heart wrenching experiences.
Secondly, and more importantly, I want you to see that even if the cult
did have the videos of your family's interviews, that would not be a bad
thing, but a good one. Think about it. What if some poor cultist
"handler" might someday be asked to view the videos. What if a paralegal
or a new lawyer for the cult might see them? Those interviews give
anyone who sees them an opportunity to understand the true, dark side of
Scientology. In fact, I would hope that many more people inside the
cult will see the stories that you and your daughters have so powerfully
told.
I guess what I'm saying is that I don't see any down side to the cult
having copies of the tapes, even if they get the parts on which you and
your daughters appear.
In fact, the likely course of action for the cult's legal whores in this
case will probably be to box up the videos, and store them away where NO
cultists could see them, and thereby be influenced by the poignancy of
your family's plight.
>>> The price that they have paid for their honesty, and their desire to warn
>>> others to avoid the unbelievable lies, manipulation and abuse they were
>>> subjected to, is that they are now victims of the single most evil aspect of
>>> Scientology, their policy of disconnection.
The disconnection of Zoe and Astra (and you) from your other family
members is incredibly sad.
The telling and spreading of your story is a very good thing, because it
warns people about the horrors that people risk when they naively join
Scientology in order to "improve" things.
>>> Anyway, on mother's day my two daughter's were in a funk. They know that they
>>> will never talk to their Mother, Grandmother or Brother again, they don't
>>> even know how to contact them. They haven't seen them in nearly two years,
>>> since the proverbial hit the fan. When they tried to call them at the Sea
>>> Organizations where they work, their calls were not forwarded. They have long
>>> since given up any attempt at getting through, as a waste of time.
It's reasonable to presume, for your own emotional health and
protection, that your family members still committed to the cult may
never speak to you again. But I would urge you to leave one kernel of
hope alive, burning on low, on a back burner. Time and ideas can work
on people in subtle, but powerful ways. The choices you and your
daughters have made to leave and Astra's decision not to abort her baby
have created a new reality for the girls' mother and brother. That new
reality could someday influence them to change as well.
Don't count on it, but don't forsake the possibility completely, either.
>> I so grieve for all of you.
There are many reasons to be sad, yes. But life isn't perfect for
anyone. Try to remember that there are also many reasons for the
Woodcrafts to be happy.
>> And I'm sorry that the
>>people you trusted turned on you this way, too, vis a vis
>>those tapes now in CofS hands.
I'm sorry that Bob and Stacy have turned their backs on people who they
asked to trust them. But the tapes themselves are a non-issue here, for
the reasons I mentioned above.
>I'm growing very weary of all of this.
I'm sure you are weary, Mark. This testimony period has been very
stressful for many people, including for some of those with whom you
spar.
I urge everyone who feels this way to take some time off. Go away for
awhile. Give yourself a break from all this crap. Maybe when (and if)
you come back, some of your senses of humor and perspective will have
returned, and the debate can once again focus on wrongdoing by the cult
of Scientology, so that other people, people just like the Woodcrafts,
will know that to grab at Scientology's shiny brass ring is really the
beginnings of a Faustian bargain.
> There must be people who can do this better than I can.
Sorry, Mark, but no one can do it better than you. Your optimism and
empathy for those poor, misguided sods still inside the cult, who so
ungraciously hate you, is a wondrous and powerful thing. That's why I
joined Bunkology.
I hope that critics of Scientology will long be inspired by your
generosity in that regard, and try to emulate your sense of compassion,
forgiveness and tolerance toward the people who shout at us, lie about
us, define us as enemies, and try to suppress our civil rights.
To finally "solve" the problems of Scientology, I think, as I know you
do, that it will be necessary to break the grip of the idea in their
minds that critics are destructive and harmful and opposed to their best
interests.
As you have often said, the cultists are just one little "cognition"
from being our friends.
We need to show them that there is simply no need for them to define
dissenters as enemies to be crushed. We need to help them see the
superiority of the idea of "live and let live."
I think your particular form of criticism has been an excellent example
of this kind of thing.
The intense bickering and personality politics that have sprung up
around the dismantling of the LMT will someday be a thing of the past
(for most of us). If Scientology has not reformed itself by then (and we
don't believe it will, do we?), I hope your quiet, friendly, gentle
voice will still be there, speaking out in favor of such reforms.
>> If Zoe or Astra would like to email me ( I have
>>grandchildren Kate's age) I'd be glad to correspond with
>>them and lend a shoulder, albeit long distance.
>>I am
>>Wiccan clergy and I do not betray confidences--I know this
>>is what Minton and Co. told you, too, but you can ask
>>Tory, for one, whether in her experience this is true.
Lawrence, my advice to your family would be to avoid any reliance on
this newsgroup or it's participants for succor. This is especially true
now, while feelings about Bob and Stacy are running so high.
We frequent this newsgroup because we have our own highly political
agendas. Sometimes our agendas might be similar to yours, sometimes they
will not be. Some people here would undoubtedly seek to co-opt your
family's good reputation to advance their positions in the many
personality and gossip pissing contests that are so rampant here right
now. You need that kind of thing like you need a hole in your head.
Try to draw whatever comfort you need from those people near you, people
with whom you can talk, face-to-face. Hopefully, these will be people
disinterested in Scientology. As your circle of friends grows, and you
each grow to trust one another, your story will eventually become known
to them, and they will be Scientology critics soon enough.
Michael Reuss
Honorary Kid
Diane Richardson
wrote:
>Referen wrote: <snip> "While you may believe
>your own life is fascinating enough to demand attention on the
>newsgroup, the rest of the world doesn't necessarily agree with your
>opinion. <snip> You chose to write about yourself and your opinion of me
>rather than discuss the issues at hand."
>
>Oh Diane:
>You're just being silly and chilly again! :) And you're delusional if
>you think you are the spokesperson for the world.
What's delusional is your suggestion I think any such thing.
>It appears you take
>great pride in saying (typing) a lot words regardless of content,
>factual basis, and sincerity.
It appears you've nothing to say, so you're now just typing garbage.
>The "issues at hand" Diane? What's that in your mind? I thought it was
>what Lawrence Woodcraft established in starting this topic thread
>"Disconnection. Lies, and Video Tape." I have fought "family
>disconnection" in the courts for over 9 years now at great monetary and
>emotional expense, and have won. To share that with this NG is not a
>"demand" process as you assert. It's an archiving exchange. It's
>discussing the issues at hand.
The issue under discussion was whether "disconnection" should be
made illegal. You apparently prefer to talk about your own life
experiences rather than that issue.
>You used the terms "ignorant and uninformed"
>twice in this preceding post of yours referring to me. By doing so, are
>you wanting this NG to to believe that you are brilliant and highly
>informed .....on the issues at hand? :)
No, I used the terms "ignorant and uninformed" because I believe that
is an appropriate description of your comments about me.
Diane Richardson
ref...@bway.net
Pts 2
'disconnection' should be made illegal. You apparently prefer to talk
about your own life experiences rather than that issue."
Diane:
You're kinda dizzy here. The issue was stated by Lawrance Woodcraft in
the above thread title. Magoo asserted an opinion that "disconnection"
should be made illegal. So that would be a sub-issue.
However, I have had direct personal experiences with both of those
issues to bring to the table. I fought "disconnection" of my minor
children in the courts for years and essentially won thus making
"disconnection" not legal....but only as it relates to minors. Now
thats case law on the books. And from case law, future judgements can
be made.
If more people were to talk about issues from real life events and first
hand knowledge, rather than theory, conjecture, hearsay, and
assumptions, there would be a lot more facts on this NG vs. typed
garbage.
Tom
<><><><><><><><><>
www.MadvilleLaw.Net
Pts 2
'disconnection' should be made illegal. You apparently prefer to talk
about your own life experiences rather than that issue."
Diane:
Tigger
I am still seeing double regarding your posts. Is it me, you or msntv?
Tigger
Starshadow
Tigger wrote:
It's fuckwit syndrome. Unfortunately this covers a wide
range of symptoms, and they seem to be proliferating.
Don't worry, though, it's rarely terminal.
Paul Hsieh
I've watched your and your daughters interviews with Stacey Brooks
serveral times with great interest. While much of the other LMT media
seems very militant, or some kind of evidence or expositions of a
certain point of view, your stories are engaging, detailed, and
powerful. In my recent curiosity about CoS (thanks to the google
constroversy of course) no other material was as compelling and
convincing about the nature of what Scientology is. In my opinion,
its the fastest and most compelling way to explain CoS to anyone who
wants to quickly get up to speed on it. I'd say its the most valuable
piece of media for the anti-CoS movement.
Like most people here, I'm very sorry for what the CoS has done to
your family, and how it continues to take its toll to this day. I
hope you can take some confort in the fact that the stand you've taken
is a powerful one that can be felt even outside of the Scientology
universe.
While the videos may not yet be in Scientologies hands yet, it does
seem like their strategy will be to somehow get them, and claim the
copyright, then break into Mark's home, etc., etc. I hope Mark is
prepared (you know, offshore copies, offshore ISP etc. (I'd recommend
Germany, of course) encrypted computer files etc.)
One thing that's always confused me is, that nobody seems to have
overtly stated what seems very compelling to me -- isn't this all just
for the purpose of lining David MisCavige's pocket book? I mean the
whole thing: the control just maintains the cult machine, which allows
them to continue to "recruit" new members, from which they just
extract either the maximum amount of money possible.
While I hear a lot about the laughable Xenu theory, what I don't hear
is that this just misdirection, and not really central the real
purpose which is to just expand David MisCavige's wealth. Or have I
just missed it? Any thoughts?
Paul Hsieh
"Magoo" <mag...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> This Disconnection Scientology uses is THE worst and most damaging thing
> they do, IMHO. Especially for young people. As I've posted before, I know 4
> young people who took their lives and the one common denominator was
> Scientology and threat of disconnection for each one.
> Scientology "justifies" it because a few other religions have something
> called "Shunning". I cannot speak for any other group...but I *Can* and Will
> speak about my experiences in Scientology.
>
> To me, Disconnection should be made illegal. These are children who cannot
> even see their mother! [...]
While I understand your sentiment, isn't family estrangement something
more general than Scientology? While it sucks, I doubt you can make
it illegal to divorce, or run away, or whatever other permutations of
family breaking activities people engage in (besides the dead-beat-dad
laws, but even those are not always successfully enforced.)
Isn't the real issue, that it is Scientology itself which perpetrates
the control over people which causes them to "disconnect" or have
"forced abortions" or imprison them, or keep them from leaving?
Without the control, Scientology could not do any of that. So, why
not instead just make mind control illegal? Without the mind control,
they wouldn't be able to do any of the nonsense that they do.
barb
First you mock him for his dyslexia, now you're mocking him for his
stutter.
Nice going, Starshadow. Yeah, I'd want my friends and family counselled
by a person as empathetic as yourself, NOT!
--
Barb
Chaplain, ARSCC
http://members.cox.net/bwarr1/index.htm
"$cientology sees the world this way: One man with a picket sign:
terrorism. Five thousand people dead in a deliberate inferno: business
opportunity.
$cientology oozes _under_ terrorists to hide."
-Chris Leithiser
barb
You've missed nothing! A lot of people encounter Scientology through the
Xenu fliers. It's a good hook...space aliens, nooklyer explosions,
wandering thetan souls...it's a great way to get somebody's attention.
However, there are a lot of fliers devoted to more serious aspects of
the cult, many of which are available on Xenu.net. Picketers have
learned, however, that nothing gets the public's attention like a good
(or really bad) space opera. If people choose to go on to research the
true evil of the cult, so much the better. If they stop with the xenu
story, chances are they will never fall prey to the cult's many lures,
and they'll pass the info on to their immediate circle as well.
Incidents like the recent Google fiasco help spread the word even
better! Most people wind up wondering why our government allows this
fraudulent and criminal organization to prey on people. This is
good...the more people who wonder that, the more woe the future holds
for Scientology in the long run. XenuTV is a wonderful teaching aid too,
the personal stories are hard to disregard.
Starshadow
barb wrote:
> Starshadow wrote:
>
>>Tigger wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Tom Padgett,
>>>
>>>I am still seeing double regarding your posts. Is it me, you or msntv?
>>>
>>>Tigger
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>It's fuckwit syndrome. Unfortunately this covers a wide
>>range of symptoms, and they seem to be proliferating.
>>
>>Don't worry, though, it's rarely terminal.
>>
>>--
>>
>>Bright Blessings,
>>
>>Starshadow, KoX, SP5, Official Wiccan Chaplain ARSCC(wdne)
>>"Scientology in 1986, after fraud judgement in favor
>>of ex-member Lawrence Wollersheim --'Not one thin dime for
>>Wollersheim'
>>Scientology May 9, 2002 before final appeal--
>>86,746,430 Thin Dimes for Wollersheim." www.factnet.org
>>www.xenu.net --what the Church of Scientology doesn't want
>>you to see
>>
>
> First you mock him for his dyslexia, now you're mocking him for his
> stutter.
> Nice going, Starshadow. Yeah, I'd want my friends and family counselled
> by a person as empathetic as yourself, NOT!
Yeah, like your compassion in speech, all the crap about
how the absolute worst thing is to anthropomorphize
animals. You are such a shining example of compassion, Barb.
Ever hear of glass houses?
Where is your compassion, Barb?
---
barb
Have you ever anthropomorphised an animal?
Starshadow
barb wrote:
You claimed I had and mocked my affection which was
returned by my cat. Of course other than by using familiar
terms you had no idea if I was actually doing it. But when
you're on a roll, you don't stop for actual verification
of what you believe to be true.
In any case, you also said it was the "worst thing"
implying somehow that any other thing done to anyone is
lesser by implication, which from where I sit would
include human rights violations.
barb
The absolute worst thing? Bah, you hyperbolize! Not surprising, coming
from you.
>
> Ever hear of glass houses?
>
> Where is your compassion, Barb?
>
Trust me, you do NOT want me to answer this one! It might hurt your
feelings again...
> ---
>
> Bright Blessings,
>
> Starshadow, KoX, SP5, Official Wiccan Chaplain ARSCC(wdne)
> "Scientology in 1986, after fraud judgement in favor
> of ex-member Lawrence Wollersheim --'Not one thin dime for
> Wollersheim'
> Scientology May 9, 2002 before final appeal--
> 86,746,430 Thin Dimes for Wollersheim." www.factnet.org
> www.xenu.net --what the Church of Scientology doesn't want
> you to see
barb
Then I see you completely misunderstood what I said. I didn't mock your
affection, I mocked your ridiculous assertion that you could know what
your cat was thinking, and in human terms. I have a friend who
consistantly attributes complex thinking abilities to his dog, which is
so stupid he will ram his head repeatedly against a sliding glass door
thinking its open. How do I know he thinks its open? Because he keeps
trying to go through it. I don't need verification, your post made it
quite clear.
>
> In any case, you also said it was the "worst thing"
> implying somehow that any other thing done to anyone is
> lesser by implication, which from where I sit would
> include human rights violations.
Maybe it is the worst thing you can do to a pet. I can't imagine a worse
life than being constantly misunderstood and misinterpreted. Happily,
all my animals benefit from my understanding of their individual
natures. Cats is cats, birds is birds, dogs is dogs. Based on my
understanding of their natural behavior, I have had great success in
providing them with comfortable lives where they're free of the
frustration of being misunderstood. My friend's poor neurotic dog is
actually quite a nice boy around me because I interact with him on his
level. But then, I have a great deal of experience with training
animals, and paying close attention to what they're really trying to
communicate to me.
I suppose your way is easier. It doesn't require much to say, "Oh look!
He thinks you're going out to buy milk!"
>
> ---
>
> Bright Blessings,
>
> Starshadow, KoX, SP5, Official Wiccan Chaplain ARSCC(wdne)
> "Scientology in 1986, after fraud judgement in favor
> of ex-member Lawrence Wollersheim --'Not one thin dime for
> Wollersheim'
> Scientology May 9, 2002 before final appeal--
> 86,746,430 Thin Dimes for Wollersheim." www.factnet.org
> www.xenu.net --what the Church of Scientology doesn't want
> you to see
Pts 2
Now now B,B,Barb, I d,d,d,d,don't s,s,s,stutter. It''s t,t,t,t,t,true
I d,d,d,don't! :8)) <snort>
Tom
--------------------------------
www.whyaretheydead.net ????
Starshadow
barb wrote:
> Starshadow wrote:
>
>>barb wrote:
>>
(Snip)
>>>Have you ever anthropomorphised an animal?
>>>--
>>>
>> You claimed I had and mocked my affection which was
>>returned by my cat. Of course other than by using familiar
>>terms you had no idea if I was actually doing it. But when
>>you're on a roll, you don't stop for actual verification
>>of what you believe to be true.
>>
>
> Then I see you completely misunderstood what I said. I didn't mock your
> affection, I mocked your ridiculous assertion that you could know what
> your cat was thinking, and in human terms. I have a friend who
> consistantly attributes complex thinking abilities to his dog, which is
> so stupid he will ram his head repeatedly against a sliding glass door
> thinking its open. How do I know he thinks its open? Because he keeps
> trying to go through it. I don't need verification, your post made it
> quite clear.
I don't know why I bother, since you seem to think you
know all about what I was saying and you got it very
wrong, but I did not say I understood what she was saying
in human terms, because she thought like a cat. As a matte
r of fact, I got that cat before her eyes were opened, and
she did, in fact, bond with me as her mother. Behavioral
scientists know of this phenomenon.
You then went on to mock me as a sentimentalist.
Sentimentalist I may be, but you had no business butting
into what was a supportive post for someone who had
undergone a loss of an animal, and belittle me for
feelings which you do not share about pets or other
animals than human in general.
It made me think less of you, that's all. Maybe you don't
care, but I told you, anyway.
This being Usenet and all, you have a right to post what
you want. I have a right to tell you I think you're a shit
for saying it that way and in that thread. That's all.
>
>> In any case, you also said it was the "worst thing"
>>implying somehow that any other thing done to anyone is
>>lesser by implication, which from where I sit would
>>include human rights violations.
>>
>
> Maybe it is the worst thing you can do to a pet. I can't imagine a worse
> life than being constantly misunderstood and misinterpreted. Happily,
> all my animals benefit from my understanding of their individual
> natures. Cats is cats, birds is birds, dogs is dogs. Based on my
> understanding of their natural behavior, I have had great success in
> providing them with comfortable lives where they're free of the
> frustration of being misunderstood. My friend's poor neurotic dog is
> actually quite a nice boy around me because I interact with him on his
> level. But then, I have a great deal of experience with training
> animals, and paying close attention to what they're really trying to
> communicate to me.
>
And your friend's experience applies to a cat you never
knew or observed, nor never knew or observed my
interactions with exactly how, Barb?
You assumed. You in fact, assumed wrong, but didn't let it
stop you. I can only think you did it because for some
reason you thought my post was a reiteration of your
earlier experiences,(with your friends who
anthropomorphize) one and two, you're pissed at me for
the high crime of being firmly on Deana's side in the
Minton controversy, since you tiptoed around other posts
wherein I stated beliefs which I know you think are so
much crap personally, until I started reiterating what I
thought about the whole Minton situation, and you got to
feeling it was tiresome.
> I suppose your way is easier. It doesn't require much to say, "Oh look!
> He thinks you're going out to buy milk!"
Since I've never said anything remotely like this nor
attributed anything remotely like this to all the cats who
have ever owned me, once again, you're assuming and
harking back to your own experiences. But like I said,
don't let little things like actual facts dissuade you.
Starshadow
barb wrote:
That is exactly what you said, Barb.
>
>>Ever hear of glass houses?
>>
>>Where is your compassion, Barb?
>>
>>
> Trust me, you do NOT want me to answer this one! It might hurt your
> feelings again...
>
You did not hurt my feelings, you disappointed me and
pissed me off a little. In general I only get angry at
things I think are worth anger and in your case, I now
consider the source, which I no longer consider as worth a
lot in these pissing matches, and it bothers me not at
all. That I took the time to answer this and the other
post, is in honor of the regard in which I used to hold you.
Keith Henson
>Dear Mr. Woodcraft,
snip
>One thing that's always confused me is, that nobody seems to have
>overtly stated what seems very compelling to me -- isn't this all just
>for the purpose of lining David MisCavige's pocket book? I mean the
>whole thing: the control just maintains the cult machine, which allows
>them to continue to "recruit" new members, from which they just
>extract either the maximum amount of money possible.
>
>While I hear a lot about the laughable Xenu theory, what I don't hear
>is that this just misdirection, and not really central the real
>purpose which is to just expand David MisCavige's wealth. Or have I
>just missed it? Any thoughts?
Money is certainly a central element in scientology, but I don't think
it is what drives DM--though he does not stent at taking large sums of
cult money for gambling.
Scientology has much the same as addictive drugs. The high level of
attention this cult (and others) provides causes the release of brain
reward chemicals that bind to the same receptors as addictive drugs.
DM gets the same kind of attention rewards that people do on the
lowest training routine.
CL argues that some cabal of lawyers is running scientology. While
lawyers are certainly getting a lot of scientology money, the cult is
run by culties not rational people.
Keith Henson