Earle Cooley's memory lapse with the Boston Globe

16 views
Skip to first unread message

Jesse Prince

unread,
Oct 9, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/9/98
to
I recently read a column by Alex Beam in the September 16 edition of the
Boston Globe. It was titled "Boston U's Scientology Connection" and it was
about Earle Cooley. One thing that really caught my eye was the part where
Beam said that "whenever Cooley and I discussed the excesses committed by
the church - the harassment of a journalist, for instance - he said he had
no knowledge of illegal activities." I had to laugh when I read this. It
was the private kind of laugh a person has when they have knowledge or
information not known by many others. Cooley said he had no knowledge of
illegal activities being done by Scientology. I offer here another voice
based on the experience of having been there.

In 1985, when I was Deputy Inspector General for External Affairs for the
Religious Technology Center (RTC), I hired Earle Cooley to represent RTC in
a RICO (Racketeering Influenced Corrupt Organizations) lawsuit against
David Mayo's Advance Ability Center (AAC), a Scientology splinter group, as
lead counsel. This decision was not made by the board of directors of RTC.
This decision was made by a trustee of RTC who is also the managing agent
of the entire Scientology empire, David Miscavige. At the time I was on the
board of directors of RTC. As new as he was to Scientology as an entity,
Cooley was eager to please because, in my opinion, he correctly smelled a
lot of money. You know, the good old American way. Cooley quickly made
himself very popular with Miscavige and was soon retained as lead counsel
for all major Scientology litigation.

These are the facts:

Scientology has and operates an intelligence network which is orchestrated
from the highest levels of the organization and extends throughout the
world. The people who run the intelligence network are in RTC, the most
senior organization within all of Scientology.

To give you an idea of how I came to have the information I am about to
tell you about Earle Cooley, in August of this year, in a hearing in U.S.
District Court in Denver, Colorado, current Scientology lead counsel Sandy
Rosen identified me as having been the #2 person in control of all of
Scientology. As he was saying this he might as well have said to the judge
by implication, "Your honor, here is yet another illustration of the fact
there is no actual corporate integrity in any of Scientology's
corporations." The intelligence operation of RTC was one area of RTC that
I was responsible for. With the advent of the RICO case, legal and
intelligence operations consumed the majority of my day. I had privilege
and access to many levels of intelligence operations and programmed
strategy against critics and enemies of Scientology. From a privileged
position, I also received daily reports of such activities as routine
information. The fact of the matter is that since L. Ron Hubbard's death,
David Miscavige has been the self-appointed managing agent of Scientology,
and it was upon his direct orders that I carried out the legal and
intelligence actions involving Earle Cooley.

It has been almost six years since I left Scientology physically and
almost 3 years since I left them in my mind. I guess it has taken me a
minute to wake up from Scientology, because I was there for 16 years.
That's a long time, some people we all know haven't even been alive that
long.l

Anyway, to bring a long story to the point, I was with Earle under the
conditions given above. Earle was fully aware of the tactical intelligence
capabilities of Scientology and took advantage of it to make a name for
himself, in my opinion. Wanna know why I think this? I'll tell you.

The key piece of evidence provided in the RTC RICO case for a preliminary
injunction against the aforementioned Scientology splinter group (AAC,
David Mayo) was a newly authored rendition of one of Scientology's most
sacred (only to them) scriptures, NOTs. This is a well known acronym for
those that are familiar with Scientology. Suffice to say, the bottom line
is that NOTs was a good source of income for a market share that could
afford it . NOTs is very expensive and, considering the fact that the
information contained in this "secret information" is so ridiculous, only a
fool would ask why upon first glance. Scientology can and does condition
its parishioners into a mental state of utter foolishness in my humble
opinion., based on actual experience.

David Mayo was principle in the authorship of the NOT's materials as
practiced in Scientology today, but surrendered his rights to authorship,
or more correctly stated, his co-authorship with LRH. After Mayo was
expelled from Scientology he authored another version of NOTs for his own
movement, and market share of dissident Scientologists from which he found
success, much to the dismay of Scientology. Believe it or not, the point
of David's rights to authorship never gained recognition in the RICO case
because Mayo's lawyers never argued the point. I wonder if Mayo had a
lawyer hired by Scientology to represent him? Every NOTs issue bore the
initials DM, which stands for David Mayo, not David Miscavige. Now you see
yet another example of why it takes more than an instant to recover
mentally from a dance with Scientology.

So deep was the deception in this case, that in his own defense Mayo never
questioned how Scientology ever obtained a copy of his newly authored NOTs
issues being used against him in a court of law. The fact of the matter is
that RTC paid and hired an informant to steal these materials from under
Mayo's nose.

Earle Cooley coached me for nearly ten hours before I was to appear as a
witness in the RICO preliminary injunction hearing in the case against
David Mayo. He told me how to answer questions when I was asked by Mayo's
attorneys and also what I should say when Earle himself asked me questions.


The last question I asked Earle Cooley before I went on as a witness was
this, "What do I say if someone asks where I got the copy that I now submit
as evidence to the court, of Mayo's newly authored NOTs materials?" Earle
Cooley told me to say that a concerned parishioner dropped it off at RTC
anonymously. Cooley was fully aware at the time of the fact that
Scientology paid an informant to steal Mayo's NOTs issues. For some weeks
before, like me, Cooley had been receiving reports and was being verbally
briefed by Marty Rathbun and David Miscavige on every intelligence
operation ongoing in Scientology. Now he had a chance to act out his own
fantasies and create or be part of creating new ideas to torment the
critics and enemies of Scientology. Why does almost every lawyer in America
think he's an expert spy? I don't know. Now it seemed I'd hired Mr. Get
Smart Cooley to show and teach me how to lie in court. Again, amazingly,
the point never even came up.

I could go on at length with stories like this about Earle Cooley. But
maybe just this one story will help refresh his memory for the next time he
talks to a columnist for the Boston Globe.

This is how Earle Cooley walked in the door of Scientology. Things only
got worse from his advice on how to carry out covert intelligence
operations, always "off the record. After the 1977 FBI raid the amount of
covert intelligence operations that were being done in Scientology had
diminished. But when Earle Cooley hooked up with Scientology, covert
operations started increasing again. Some trend Mr. Cooley got started.

Out of all the so-called "brilliant leaders" in Scientology during the time
I was there, the only major players that had a college education were the
lawyers. I'll let you tell me what happened then. The old maxim applies:
Never give a sucker an even break, and the attorneys have played DM, who
never even finished high school, for a total fool. Soon he will be thrown
away, just like he threw L Ron Hubbard away and for the same reasons.

It would be wrong for me to give Earle Cooley credit for more intellectual
prowess than he deserves. Other lawyers were involved who were much more
intelligent and much more highly paid than Earle Cooley. Cooley had
criminal tendencies so he seemed to fit in well with Scientology. Another
difference in the other lawyers is they never ever claimed to be
Scientologists, which was true. There was nothing Scientology could do for
these lawyers but pay them handsomely. I believe for me to reveal or speak
against those particular attorneys could threaten my life. However, in the
event of death, what I know has been written down and will survive me. I'm
truly not worried about such a fate at this time, it's out of my hands,
literally.

Alex Beam also wrote:

"I contend that Cooley is more than "just" a lawyer for Scientology. I say
he is deeply allied with one of the greatest anti-intellectual movements of
our time, and his activities are wildly incompatible with his status as top
official of a major American university."

This conclusion could not be more accurate given the lack of education by
current Scientology managing agent David Miscavige. Not to mention the lack
of formal education by Scientology founder L Ron Hubbard. Hubbard has been
dead for nearly 12 years. He died mentally incompetent, a victim of his own
machinations.

I sure hope Mr. Cooley and his conscience reacquaint. Reason? It's time
for him to be honest about his relationship with Scientology. The truth has
always been and will forever be stranger and more fascinating than a lie
could ever be.

Respectfully submitted,

Jesse Prince



Neal Hamel

unread,
Oct 10, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/10/98
to
On Fri, 09 Oct 1998 22:19:48 GMT, jes...@gte.net (Jesse Prince)
wrote:

>I recently read a column by Alex Beam in the September 16 edition of the
>Boston Globe. It was titled "Boston U's Scientology Connection" and it was
>about Earle Cooley. One thing that really caught my eye was the part where
>Beam said that "whenever Cooley and I discussed the excesses committed by
>the church - the harassment of a journalist, for instance - he said he had
>no knowledge of illegal activities." I had to laugh when I read this. It
>was the private kind of laugh a person has when they have knowledge or
>information not known by many others. Cooley said he had no knowledge of
>illegal activities being done by Scientology. I offer here another voice
>based on the experience of having been there.
>


Did you send this Alex Beam?

-Neal H.

JimDBB

unread,
Oct 10, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/10/98
to

>Subject: Earle Cooley's memory lapse with the Boston Globe
>From: jes...@gte.net (Jesse Prince)

>I recently read a column by Alex Beam in the September 16 edition of the
>Boston Globe. It was titled "Boston U's Scientology Connection" and it was
>about Earle Cooley.

Thanks for posting this, Jessie Prince. It is absolutely appalling that
scientologist and stooge attorney for the scientology cult Earl
Cooley is still on the Board of Boston U. This is the guy that raaaided Arnie
Lerma's home for the cult.

JimDBB

Anonymous

unread,
Oct 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/11/98
to
jes...@gte.net (Jesse Prince) wrote:

Blablabla

When are you going to address the question of the fake OT VIII
bulletin?

ef

unread,
Oct 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/11/98
to
In article <1998101023...@replay.com>, Anonymous
<nob...@replay.com> wrote:

> jes...@gte.net (Jesse Prince) wrote:
>
> Blablabla
>


hmm. interesting mode of discourse.


> When are you going to address the question of the fake OT VIII
> bulletin?


i believe the gist of mr. prince's post was about mr. cooleys somewhat
slippery definition of truth. you have a rather creative way of refuting
it, nay?

ef

Deana Marie Holmes

unread,
Oct 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/11/98
to
On 11 Oct 1998 01:31:42 +0200, Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:

>Blablabla


>
>When are you going to address the question of the fake OT VIII
>bulletin?

Why should he?

Have Jesse ever had anything to say about the fake OT8 bulletin?


Deana Marie Holmes
The Few, The Proud, The Banned (2x + 1 ISP on Scientology ban list)
$cientology: Sponsor Windows84: "Where CAN'T you go today?
mir...@xmission.com

spar...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Oct 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/11/98
to
Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:

> When are you going to address the question of the fake OT VIII
> bulletin?

Did you or any of your colleagues indicate that,
since the OT VIII presently in circulation is a
forgery, it's ok to post it?

If it is a forgery, why did Kobrin and company fight
so hard to protect RTC's copyright on it?

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own

Mike O'Connor

unread,
Oct 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/11/98
to
In article <1998101200...@replay.com>, Anonymous
<nob...@replay.com> wrote:

> spar...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> >Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:
> >
> >> When are you going to address the question of the fake OT VIII
> >> bulletin?
> >
> >Did you or any of your colleagues indicate that,
> >since the OT VIII presently in circulation is a
> >forgery, it's ok to post it?
> >
> >If it is a forgery, why did Kobrin and company fight
> >so hard to protect RTC's copyright on it?
>

> To my knowledge, the CoS did claim that it was a forgery, and didn't
> try to enforce copyright on it.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 10:02:10 +0100
Message-ID: <358240...@virgin.net>
[...]

Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 16:23:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: Helena Kobrin <h...@netcom.com>
Subject: E-Mail of 7 Jun 98 re: Jesus
[...]
As you are obviously well aware, the material which you quote in your
e-mail to me is a forgery. It was not written by Mr. Hubbard, nor could
there be a tape of him stating these words, because he did not. I
therefore put you on notice that if you purport to come up with such a
tape, it will be an obvious fabrication. If you attempt to make any false
attributions of such material to Mr. Hubbard, your action will be dealt
with accordingly under applicable laws.

Sincerely,
Helena Kobrin

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Cult lawyer Helena Kobrin has stated more than once that her cult makes no
claim of copyright or authorship. Here it is:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 MAY 1980
ISSUE I

LIMITED
DISTRIBUTION
OT VIII Course Students
OT VIII Auditors
OT VIII C/Ses
AO Review Auditors
AO C/Ses

OT VIII Series 1

C O N F I D E N T I A L

STUDENT BRIEFING


By the time you read this I will no longer be occupying the body and
identity that you have known as Ron. That identity continues to live in
the hearts and minds of many as well as in on-Source tech and admin
centers around the planet, and will inspire for years to come
Scientologists and lovers of truth everywhere.

What follows is a story that has been withheld, for reasons which
will soon be obvious, until such time as there were enough OTs that
something could be done about it. That time is now. It is not a nice or
a pretty story, I trust that having arrived on the OT VIII Course you are
ready to hear it. You have undoubtedly heard pieces of data over the years
that hinted at the greater untold reality of my mission here on Earth, but
the story was never written, nor spoken, in its entirety due to security
problems that have unfortunately always plagued the organization. It is
only now that I feel it safe to release the information, although the time
is rapidly approaching when I will have no choice in the matter, the hour
draws that near.

I am not going to delve too deeply into specifics as people have a
tendency to bog themselves down in significance, which would only serve to
delay the immediacy of the task at hand. Therefore I will be brief.

Some eighty-odd million years ago Earth time (it actually dates at
78,395,042 but dates are a bit superfluous with this material) plans were
drawn by a group outside the MEST universe for the eventual takeover of a
good portion of this universe. Not a particularly large nor imaginative
crew, their exterior perspective, however, gives them considerable
advantage over the time-bound beings of the MEST universe. Borrowing from
earlier operations such as Helatrobus, they conceived an ongoing implant,
some portions of which have been fairly faithfully rendered in parts of
the Bible. This implant, laid in by carefully controlled genetic mutation
at Incident Two of OT III and periodically reinforced by controlled
historic events since then, makes it effectively impossible for beings on
the more heavily affected planets such as Earth to become free. It causes
progressive genetic "evolution" that gives the subject population greater
and greater susceptibility to the telepathic impingement and direction of
the controllers. In its final stage the progression becomes almost
geometric, and it is this final stage that we are rapidly approaching.

Another aspect of this GE-line implant is that the body becomes in
effect a sort of theta trap that kicks in heavily on the being should he
attempt to expand his horizons beyond that of pure physical universe
reality. There can be temporary key-outs which we have all experienced in
varying degrees, but until this area is handled it can honestly be said
that there is no hope for continued expansion. The good news is that once
this is run out, expansion becomes rather effortless and almost automatic.

No doubt you are familiar with the Revelations section of the Bible
where various events are predicted. Also mentioned is a brief period of
time in which an arch-enemy of Christ, referred to as the anti-Christ,
will reign and his opinions will have sway. All this makes for very
fantastic, entertaining reading but there is truth in it. This
anti-Christ represents the forces of Lucifer (literally, the "light
bearer" or "light bringer"), Lucifer being a mythical representation of
the forces of enlightenment, the Galactic Confederacy. My mission could
be said to fulfill the Biblical promise represented by this brief
anti-Christ period. During this period there is a fleeting opportunity
for the whole scenario to be effectively derailed, which would make it
impossible for the mass Marcabian landing (Second Coming) to take place.
The Second Coming is designed, among other things, to trigger a rapid
series of destructive events.

With the exception of the original Buddhism, virtually all religions
of any consequence on this planet, mono- and pantheistic alike, have been
instruments to speed the progress of this "evolution of consciousness" and
bring about the eventual enslavement of mankind. As you know, Siddhartha
Gautama never claimed to be anything more than a man. Having caught on to
this operation, he postulated his own return as Metteyya, part of which
prophecy will have been fulfilled upon the passing of L. Ron Hubbard.

For those of you whose Christian toes I may have stepped on, let me
take the opportunity to disabuse you of some lovely myths. For instance,
the historic Jesus was not nearly the sainted figure he has been made out
to be. In addition to being a lover of young boys and men, he was given
to uncontrollable bursts of temper and hatred that belied the general
message of love, understanding and other typical Marcab PR. You have only
to look at the history his teachings inspired to see where it all
inevitably leads. It is historical fact and yet Man still clings to the
ideal, so deep and insidious is the biological implanting.

It is a good joke that the Galactic Confederacy is associated with
the Serpent in the Garden, the Beast and other emissaries of the "Prince
of Darkness". Yet in certain passages and esoteric interpretations of the
Bible (much of which has been taken out and effectively suppressed for
centuries) as well as the Cabbalah, the truth reveals itself quite nicely
for the clever and the ungullible.

So it really is a race against time and one that we happen to be
losing at the moment, as the implant drama inexorably plays itself out in
spite of the breakneck pace I've managed to keep up these last thirty-five
years.

I had an inkling, but only that, of the insidiousness of this
material as far back as 1945. Later, in characteristic overoptimism, I
thought that R6 would be the end of it. But that was followed by NOTs and
the Purification Rundown and still the string continued to unwind with the
ball at the end of it just out of sight. It makes one wonder about such
things as fate and destiny, such was the resolve with which I managed to
cling to that string, not often knowing how close I was to falling into
the abyss myself. But destiny is merely the rationalization of feeble
minds. Things don't just happen, they are caused. And causative beings
can undo the plans of madmen and would-be enslavers, no matter how long
those plans may have been in the making.

I will soon leave this world only to return and complete my mission
with another identity. Although I long to stretch my arms back in repose
on some distant star in some distant galaxy, it appears that that is one
dream that will have to wait. But my return depends on people like you
doing these materials thoroughly and completely so that there will be a
genetically uncontaminated body for me to pick up and resume where I left
off. A body free of religious mania, right/wrong dichotomy and synthetic
karma. The job ahead is far too tough to even contemplate doing with your
standard -- courtesy of certain other-dimensional players and their Marcab
pieces, many of whom are right here in the general populace -- genetically
altered body.

Without the biogenetic meddling of those who stand outside time (who
cannot yet directly influence our world and must work through others) the
dwindling spiral is not nearly as automatic and self-perpetuating as it
appears. There are regions even in isolated parts of the Milky Way where
poets are free to poet and magicians can pa [mising words]

I will return not as a religious leader but a political one. That
happens to be the requisite beingness for the task at hand. I will not be
known to most of you, my activities misunderstood by many, yet along with
your constant effort in the theta band I will effectively postpone and
then halt a series of events designed to make happy slaves of us all.

So there you have it. The secret that I have kept close to my chest
all these years. Now you too are part of this secret and I no longer have
to shoulder the burden alone or live with the possibility of body death
before all the data could be released. And with this briefing I entrust
to each of you the responsibility for this material until such time as I
am able to return. For we have no help from any other quarter in this
matter. The handful of secret societies throughout history that have
caught on to this game have long since fallen by the wayside or been taken
over and become instruments of the very menace they were set up to combat.

The rundown is long and can be arduous, but it must be done
thoroughly if there is to be any effect not only on the body of the pre-OT
but the body of his or her progeny as well. There is some danger, but
with OT VII thoroughly complete it is not nearly so great as the danger
witnessed by assorted unfortunates who happened to stumble into this area
in their sleep or in moments of reverie or anaten, experiencing an
hitherto mysterious phenomenon known as "spontaneous combustion".

CAUTION: DO NOT BE PTS WHILE TRAVERSING THIS
THIRD AND FINAL WALL OF FIRE

But the area is well charted, the rundown many years in secret
development, and by the time you read this undoubtedly completed on
myself. The wins awaiting you are like none that you have ever
experienced, not just for you, but for your children, your children's
children and the whole of mankind, if we succeed. And we will. If we had
time we would pity the many poor souls, from 1950 to PT, who chose such an
exactly inopportune moment to drop off the road to truth and disconnect
from reality, the full burst and glory of OT practically within their
grasp. But we haven't the time to "wax philosophic" or ponder might have
beens.

The rundown follows. Again I say, do it thoroughly and completely,
for it is your ticket to the stars. And beyond!

L. RON HUBBARD
FOUNDER

LRH:lrh
Copyright (c) 1980
by L. Ron Hubbard
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

-Mike
Censored by Scientology

Anonymous

unread,
Oct 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/12/98
to
mir...@newsguy.com (Deana Marie Holmes) wrote:

>On 11 Oct 1998 01:31:42 +0200, Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>
>>Blablabla
>>

>>When are you going to address the question of the fake OT VIII
>>bulletin?
>

>Why should he?
>
>Have Jesse ever had anything to say about the fake OT8 bulletin?

He used this rather debunked bulletin in one of his first post, by
claiming that this is really what it says. If he does not address the
questions other critics put up to him about it, anything else he says
is open to doubt. In fact, I am not going to going to read anything
further from him until he answers these questions.

ef

unread,
Oct 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/12/98
to
In article <1998101200...@replay.com>, Anonymous
<nob...@replay.com> wrote:

haha. as if you ever read his posts. i mean really read them.

ef

Anonymous

unread,
Oct 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/12/98
to
spar...@my-dejanews.com wrote:

>Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>
>> When are you going to address the question of the fake OT VIII
>> bulletin?
>

Neal Hamel

unread,
Oct 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/12/98
to
On 12 Oct 1998 02:30:13 +0200, Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:

>
>He used this rather debunked bulletin in one of his first post, by
>claiming that this is really what it says. If he does not address the
>questions other critics put up to him about it, anything else he says
>is open to doubt. In fact, I am not going to going to read anything
>further from him until he answers these questions.
>

Why would anyone care what an anonymous poster, apparently from OSA,
reads?

Of course, I could be wrong. Why don't you tell us more about
yourself?

-Neal H.

Perry Scott

unread,
Oct 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/12/98
to
In article <6vm27i$kbi$1...@news-2.news.gte.net>, jes...@gte.net says...

>Scientology can and does condition
>its parishioners into a mental state of utter foolishness in my humble
>opinion., based on actual experience.


.sig! .sig! I consider this to be an expert opinion. ROTFLMAO.

Jesse, I gotta come down to Boulder some day and buy you a beer.

Perry Scott [ScienoCensored 3 times]
Co$ Escapee
http://www.ezlink.com/~perry/CoS/Theology [ScienoCensored domain]

Anonymous

unread,
Oct 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/12/98
to
smok...@ix.netcom.com (Neal Hamel) wrote:

>On 12 Oct 1998 02:30:13 +0200, Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>He used this rather debunked bulletin in one of his first post, by
>>claiming that this is really what it says. If he does not address the
>>questions other critics put up to him about it, anything else he says
>>is open to doubt. In fact, I am not going to going to read anything
>>further from him until he answers these questions.
>
>Why would anyone care what an anonymous poster, apparently from OSA,
>reads?

That's not so. I read with interest what Jessy wrote up till now, but
my doubts in face of his persistence in refusing to address this issue
increased to the point where I am not interested to read anything else
from him until he does.

Another aspects I find fascinating is critics unquestioning acceptance
of what this so-called number two in command has to say. Didn't we
hear that the rank and file Scientologists are OK but it's the
"management" who is corrupt and exploits the poor unsuspecting low
level members? How come nobody inquires to Jessy as to what *he* did
to exploit them? Or is it that the theory isn't valid anymore, all of
a sudden?

Rod Keller

unread,
Oct 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/12/98
to
Anonymous (nob...@replay.com) wrote:
: smok...@ix.netcom.com (Neal Hamel) wrote:
: >Why would anyone care what an anonymous poster, apparently from OSA,

: >reads?
:
: That's not so. I read with interest what Jessy wrote up till now, but
: my doubts in face of his persistence in refusing to address this issue
: increased to the point where I am not interested to read anything else
: from him until he does.

I think Neal's comments above still stand. Go, refuse, and be happy.

: Another aspects I find fascinating is critics unquestioning acceptance


: of what this so-called number two in command has to say. Didn't we
: hear that the rank and file Scientologists are OK but it's the
: "management" who is corrupt and exploits the poor unsuspecting low
: level members? How come nobody inquires to Jessy as to what *he* did
: to exploit them? Or is it that the theory isn't valid anymore, all of
: a sudden?

You need other people to ask your questions for you, I guess. I'm sure
Jesse (note the spelling) will get around to telling us what he wants. But
a.r.s is not the confessional. Unless of course, you would like to start.
What are your crimes?

--
Rod Keller / rke...@voicenet.com / Irresponsible Publisher
Black Hat #1 / Expert of the Toilet / CWPD Mouthpiece
The Lerma Apologist / Merchant of Chaos / Vision of Destruction
Killer Rod / OSA Patsy / Quasi-Scieno / Mental Bully

Martin Hunt

unread,
Oct 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/12/98
to
In article <1998101220...@replay.com>,
Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:

>Another aspects I find fascinating is critics unquestioning acceptance
>of what this so-called number two in command has to say.

Your blanket charge is irrational; you should have said "some critics".
I don't find Jesse Prince very credible, as 1. he doesn't post to
ars in his own words, and 2. he hasn't answered the question about
slapping a Scientologist - in fact, it has been studiously ignored.
His webpage will remain down until these two points have been answered
to my satisfaction. Apparently, he's not interested in my satisfaction,
which is his right; but in that case, I cannot find him credible.

--
Cogito, ergo sum. Just the FAQs: http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~av282/


Gregg Hagglund

unread,
Oct 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/13/98
to
In article <one.hopes-111...@cr403509-a.crdva1.bc.wave.home.com>,
one....@somewhere.land (ef) wrote:

>In article <1998101200...@replay.com>, Anonymous
><nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>
>> mir...@newsguy.com (Deana Marie Holmes) wrote:
>>
>> >On 11 Oct 1998 01:31:42 +0200, Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>Blablabla
>> >>

>> >>When are you going to address the question of the fake OT VIII
>> >>bulletin?
>> >

>> >Why should he?
>> >
>> >Have Jesse ever had anything to say about the fake OT8 bulletin?
>>

>> He used this rather debunked bulletin in one of his first post, by
>> claiming that this is really what it says. If he does not address the
>> questions other critics put up to him about it, anything else he says
>> is open to doubt. In fact, I am not going to going to read anything
>> further from him until he answers these questions.
>

>haha. as if you ever read his posts. i mean really read them.
>
>ef

As if this maroon could even *answer* a question!<smirk>
Most of the anonymouses lately appear to be Co$hills
who are too afraid of their shadows to post openly, and
have not the slightest ability to answer some very
hard to face questions. This is very fortunate for
us as the Co$shills continue to appear furtive,
sly and dishonest to most casual observers.

[Please don't tell him that Jesse doesn't read ARS, but
does post information to it. It will ruin his day to find out
he has been whining to no end.<grin>]

---
["You know, people die if they criticize scientology -
I should take care if I were you."
-Marcus Nyman, OSA (former GO), $cio-org, Stockholm, Sweden.]

Gregg Hagglund SP5
Rendered Net Invisible to
Participating Victims of Co$.

Toronto Picket Reports now at:
<http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/Spa/8412/>


Anonymous

unread,
Oct 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/13/98
to
rke...@netaxs.com (Rod Keller) wrote:

>Anonymous (nob...@replay.com) wrote:
>: smok...@ix.netcom.com (Neal Hamel) wrote:
>: >Why would anyone care what an anonymous poster, apparently from OSA,
>: >reads?
>:
>: That's not so. I read with interest what Jessy wrote up till now, but
>: my doubts in face of his persistence in refusing to address this issue
>: increased to the point where I am not interested to read anything else
>: from him until he does.
>
>I think Neal's comments above still stand. Go, refuse, and be happy.

Am not missing much - just close your eyes on Jessy's refusal to
address the question of the OT VIII bulletin. As a critic, that's why
you are here for anyway.

>: Another aspects I find fascinating is critics unquestioning acceptance
>: of what this so-called number two in command has to say. Didn't we
>: hear that the rank and file Scientologists are OK but it's the
>: "management" who is corrupt and exploits the poor unsuspecting low
>: level members? How come nobody inquires to Jessy as to what *he* did
>: to exploit them? Or is it that the theory isn't valid anymore, all of
>: a sudden?
>
>You need other people to ask your questions for you, I guess.

You guess right. Like culties, critics don't consider the value of a
question by itself, but by who is putting it.

>I'm sure
>Jesse (note the spelling) will get around to telling us what he wants. But
>a.r.s is not the confessional. Unless of course, you would like to start.
>What are your crimes?

Hey - I am just a victim (remember?). Your two-faces are fascinating.
One time you come up with one convenient theory, when it suits you,
and the other time you just rationalize it away, when it suits you. Of
course, you are just a critic - so no one in its right mind expects
anything else from you.

Anonymous

unread,
Oct 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/13/98
to

Anonymous

unread,
Oct 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/13/98
to
smok...@ix.netcom.com (Neal Hamel) wrote:

>On 12 Oct 1998 02:30:13 +0200, Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>
>>

>>He used this rather debunked bulletin in one of his first post, by
>>claiming that this is really what it says. If he does not address the
>>questions other critics put up to him about it, anything else he says
>>is open to doubt. In fact, I am not going to going to read anything
>>further from him until he answers these questions.
>

>Why would anyone care what an anonymous poster, apparently from OSA,
>reads?

That's not so. I read with interest what Jessy wrote up till now, but
my doubts in face of his persistence in refusing to address this issue
increased to the point where I am not interested to read anything else
from him until he does.

Another aspects I find fascinating is critics unquestioning acceptance

Anonymous

unread,
Oct 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/13/98
to
elr...@cgo.wave.ca (Gregg Hagglund) wrote:

>In article <one.hopes-111...@cr403509-a.crdva1.bc.wave.home.com>,
>one....@somewhere.land (ef) wrote:
>
>>In article <1998101200...@replay.com>, Anonymous
>><nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>>
>>> mir...@newsguy.com (Deana Marie Holmes) wrote:
>>>
>>> >On 11 Oct 1998 01:31:42 +0200, Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>Blablabla
>>> >>
>>> >>When are you going to address the question of the fake OT VIII
>>> >>bulletin?
>>> >
>>> >Why should he?
>>> >
>>> >Have Jesse ever had anything to say about the fake OT8 bulletin?
>>>

>>> He used this rather debunked bulletin in one of his first post, by
>>> claiming that this is really what it says. If he does not address the
>>> questions other critics put up to him about it, anything else he says
>>> is open to doubt. In fact, I am not going to going to read anything
>>> further from him until he answers these questions.
>>

>>haha. as if you ever read his posts. i mean really read them.
>>
>>ef
>
> As if this maroon could even *answer* a question!<smirk>
> Most of the anonymouses lately appear to be Co$hills
> who are too afraid of their shadows to post openly, and
> have not the slightest ability to answer some very
> hard to face questions.

LOL - one just can look at your weaseling out at providing the facts
about the "many members who left the COS as a result of ars", and,
before that, at the statement that "more ex-members post in this
newsgroup than outsiders"... Would warrant a full analysis as a
typical critic's failure to come up with the facts to substantiable
their own claim. You have no idea how pathetic and lame you look to
any intelligent observer who actually have the patience to follow all
this, which I doubt.

>This is very fortunate for
> us as the Co$shills continue to appear furtive,
> sly and dishonest to most casual observers.

The pot calling the kettle black.

> [Please don't tell him that Jesse doesn't read ARS, but
>does post information to it. It will ruin his day to find out
>he has been whining to no end.<grin>]

How convenient - and of course no critics will mail him the genuine
requests - made by other critics, BTW.

Please come up with other lame excuses. I love it.

Anonymous

unread,
Oct 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/13/98
to
mar...@islandnet.com (Martin Hunt) wrote:

>In article <1998101220...@replay.com>,
>Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>

>>Another aspects I find fascinating is critics unquestioning acceptance
>>of what this so-called number two in command has to say.
>

>Your blanket charge is irrational; you should have said "some critics".
>I don't find Jesse Prince very credible, as 1. he doesn't post to
>ars in his own words, and 2. he hasn't answered the question about
>slapping a Scientologist - in fact, it has been studiously ignored.
>His webpage will remain down until these two points have been answered
>to my satisfaction. Apparently, he's not interested in my satisfaction,
>which is his right; but in that case, I cannot find him credible.

Ah? Well, I have to admit that that's pretty unusual. I'll wait and
see how it turns out.

Ron Newman

unread,
Oct 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/13/98
to
In article <1998101311...@replay.com>, Anonymous
<nob...@replay.com> wrote:

> That's not so. I read with interest what Jessy wrote up till now, but
> my doubts in face of his persistence in refusing to address this issue
> increased to the point where I am not interested to read anything else
> from him until he does.

Why do you consistently misspell Jesse's name? You've done it enough
times that it's definitely not a typing error. Did he use to spell it
differently?

--
Ron Newman rne...@thecia.net
http://www2.thecia.net/users/rnewman/

Gregg Hagglund

unread,
Oct 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/13/98
to
In article <1998101312...@replay.com>, Anonymous
<nob...@replay.com> wrote:

(snip)


>
>Please come up with other lame excuses. I love it.

Only an OSAShill would call a lame excuse my desire
to keep my word and not compromise the confidences
of those who have given me their trust.

It is the Co$ which has a history and a policy of
'Fair Game', including intimidation of all kinds,
meted out tothose who oppose it or leave it and
speak out, not I.
It is the Co$ which is a Criminally Convicted
Corporation for Breaches of the Public Trust,
not I.
It is the OSA which as a SOP culls and betrays
the information given my Co$ members and
recorded in Auditing, not I

Only an OSAShill would call a lame excuse my desire
to keep my word and not compromise the confidences
of those who have given me their trust.

That you call my valid reasons not to expose these
people an 'excuse' and imply I am evading the issue
instead of betraying them to OSA INTEL which
monitors this media, makes you look more like the
whining loser you are.

You and your fellow Co$Shills will not answer
a range of questions, none of which betray anyones
confidence, but do reveal many unpleasant and
socially unacceptable Co$ practices, amongst other things.

You and your fellow Co$Shills more oft than not
simply ignore pertinent questions. But you certainly
try to make a point on those rare occasions, usually
for reasons of confidentiality, when I or another critic
will not supply details to an assertion.
Most lurkers will have witnessed critics here
frequently accepting being corrected on misinformation or
offering substantiated correction of misinformation.
This is something Co$ shills will not and
can not do.

It is simply ludicrous to all of us and likely to
most lurkers, you and your fellow Co$Shills
'insist' on any answer when you will not
even post under your own name, (or make things
marginally simple by using a 'non de plume')
and refuse to deal with a plethora of questions
which remain unanswered by the Co$ for *years*
here on ARS.

I believe the lurkers here can easily tell the difference
between my Integrity and your Dishonesty.

Here are just some 'unhandled' questions:

Perhaps you might tell me how many people have
joined the Co$ because they read ARS and
found the documented Xenu and the Space Cootie mythology
wonderful and the documented outrageous financial and/or
time demands of the Co$ acceptable and/or
the documented International Criminal Record and
Fraudulent Activities of the Co$ admirable?

Here are just some 'unhandled' questions:

Would you care to document the ludicrous claim
by the Co$ of having 8 million current members?
Or was that 10 Million?

Or would you care to ratify Mr. Buttnor's
claim made in January of last year on CFRA
Radio in Ottawa of 100,000 members in
Ontario with documentation?

Didn't think so.

HATD Masroon

Anonymous

unread,
Oct 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/13/98
to
rne...@thecia.net (Ron Newman) wrote:

>In article <1998101311...@replay.com>, Anonymous
><nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>
>> That's not so. I read with interest what Jessy wrote up till now, but
>> my doubts in face of his persistence in refusing to address this issue
>> increased to the point where I am not interested to read anything else
>> from him until he does.
>
>Why do you consistently misspell Jesse's name? You've done it enough
>times that it's definitely not a typing error. Did he use to spell it
>differently?

No. I find it cute that way.

John Mark Ockerbloom

unread,
Oct 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/13/98
to
In article <1998101200...@replay.com>,
Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>mir...@newsguy.com (Deana Marie Holmes) wrote:
>>On 11 Oct 1998 01:31:42 +0200, Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>>>When are you going to address the question of the fake OT VIII
>>>bulletin?
>>
>>Have Jesse ever had anything to say about the fake OT8 bulletin?

In Message-ID <35c67b4b...@news.tiac.net>, Jesse Prince describes OT8
as follows:

"Moving along, we get to OT8 and what does LRH say now? He says that he
is Satan, the "bringer of light," and he makes mention of a final
conflict as given in the Book of Revelations. Again I ask, why call
Scientology a religion when its founder believes he is the antithesis
of God - the Devil himself?"

This appears to be a reference to the alleged OT8 in the Fishman affidavit,
which includes this paragraph, 2 paragraphs before the "Jesus was a pedophile"
claim:

"No doubt you are familiar with the Revelations section of the Bible where

various events are predicted. Also mentioned Is a brief period of time in
which an arch-enemy of Christ. reforred to as the anti-Christ, will reign


and his opinions will have sway. All this makes for very fantastic,
entertaining reading but there is truth in it. This anti-Christ represents

the forces of Lucifer (literally, the "light bearers" or "light bringer"),


Lucifer being a mythical representation of the forces of enlightenment, the
Galactic Confederacy. My mission could be said to fulfill the Biblical
promise represented by this brief anti-Christ period. During this period

there is a fleeting opportunity for the whole scenario to be. effectively
derailed. which would make it impossible for the mass Marcabian landing

(Second Coming) to take place. The Second Coming is designed, among other
things, to trigger a rapid series of destructive events."

(See http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Fishman/Declaration/ot8b.html for the whole
thing.)

Other folks who have gone through OT8 claim this isn't what they read.
Likewise, the CoS[tm] has usually claimed this isn't a copyrighted document
of theirs, though it hasn't always been consistent about this. (See
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Fishman/Declaration/ot8-debate.html for more
details.)

It remains possible that the document might be by Hubbard, and perhaps
even used at one point as part of OT8, since I gather the OT levels
have been reworked somewhat over time. However, I remain skeptical about
this. If Jesse Prince would like to explain this further, I'd be interested
in hearing about it.

John Mark Ockerbloom

Ishmael

unread,
Oct 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/13/98
to
Somebody got confused (probably Fishman) in reference to the document. It is
most likely from a Class VIII course student briefing taped aboard the Apollo.
It has nothing to do with OT VIII. This is the 3rd or 4th time I've reiterated
this, but I'll keep trying until the confusion subsides.

Ishmael


In article <700b4h$i9f$1...@mistletoe.srv.cs.cmu.edu>, sp...@cs.cmu.edu says...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
...there is no folly of the beast of the earth which is not infinitely outdone
by the madness of men.--Herman Melville
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ARS Blow Pool: Rinder will blow 10 Feb., 1999 09:30 GMT

ef

unread,
Oct 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/13/98
to
In article <1998101323...@replay.com>, Anonymous
<nob...@replay.com> wrote:

> elr...@cgo.wave.ca (Gregg Hagglund) wrote:
>
> >In article <1998101312...@replay.com>, Anonymous
> ><nob...@replay.com> wrote:
> >
> >(snip)
> >>
> >>Please come up with other lame excuses. I love it.
> >
> > Only an OSAShill would call a lame excuse my desire
> >to keep my word and not compromise the confidences
> >of those who have given me their trust.
>

> You are a clueless twit - I repeatedly asked you to come up with
> evidences of *posters*, not emailers - something you just ignored
> repeatedly and kept repeating your hypocritical obfuscation and your
> irrelevant questions rather than come up with the facts.

and you have been told a gazillion times that most ex-members of the cos
do not dare post publicly as they fear the (documented) reprisals that the
"church" so very religiously foists upon their imaginary "enemies". thus,
(as you have been told a gazillion times, yes?) they prefer emailing
posters privately instead of them themselves posting. and no, none, who
have received such communications, will out them here.

what of this do you not understand??

or are you, once again, twisting words in the wind of your imaginary
"handling tech".

it ain't working, ya know. you end up impressing yourself, only.

ef (and btw, i do not call *you* names, no matter what i think of you)

Gregg Hagglund

unread,
Oct 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/13/98
to
In article <1998101312...@replay.com>, Anonymous
<nob...@replay.com> wrote:

(snip)
>
>Please come up with other lame excuses. I love it.

Only an OSAShill would call a lame excuse my desire
to keep my word and not compromise the confidences
of those who have given me their trust.

It is the Co$ which has a history and a policy of


'Fair Game', including intimidation of all kinds,
meted out tothose who oppose it or leave it and
speak out, not I.
It is the Co$ which is a Criminally Convicted
Corporation for Breaches of the Public Trust,
not I.
It is the OSA which as a SOP culls and betrays
the information given my Co$ members and
recorded in Auditing, not I

That you call my valid reasons not to expose these

Would you care to document the ludicrous claim
by the Co$ of having 8 million current members?
Or was that 10 Million?

Or would you care to ratify Mr. Buttnor's
claim made in January of last year on CFRA
Radio in Ottawa of 100,000 members in
Ontario with documentation?

Didn't think so.

HATD Maroon

Ishmael

unread,
Oct 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/13/98
to
In article <3625f34a...@news.newsguy.com>, jmen...@piranha.org says...

>
>On 13 Oct 1998 14:48:24 -0700, Ishmael <ishma...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Somebody got confused (probably Fishman) in reference to the document. It is
>>most likely from a Class VIII course student briefing taped aboard the Apollo.
>>It has nothing to do with OT VIII.
>>
>
>Can you document *this*?

That's a relative term. Try searching here
http://wpxx02.toxi.uni-wuerzburg.de/~krasel/CoS/search.html for a reference.
It's out there somewhere--I've read it.

>This would be just as effective as proving it it/was "OTVIII"
>to show the antichristian pederasty of Mr. Hubbard.
>
>Joe
>
>--
>jmen...@piranha.org

Gregg Hagglund

unread,
Oct 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/13/98
to
one....@somewhere.land (ef) wrote:

>In article <1998101323...@replay.com>, Anonymous
><nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>
>> elr...@cgo.wave.ca (Gregg Hagglund) wrote:
>>

>> >In article <1998101312...@replay.com>, Anonymous
>> ><nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >(snip)
>> >>
>> >>Please come up with other lame excuses. I love it.
>> >
>> > Only an OSAShill would call a lame excuse my desire
>> >to keep my word and not compromise the confidences
>> >of those who have given me their trust.
>>

>> You are a clueless twit - I repeatedly asked you to come up with
>> evidences of *posters*, not emailers - something you just ignored
>> repeatedly and kept repeating your hypocritical obfuscation and your
>> irrelevant questions rather than come up with the facts.
>

ROTFL! You call me clueless? IIRC I never claimed to have
communicated with "posters", but with several individuals
via email who had left the Co$ after investigating ARS and
the websites surrounding it. How stupid are you anyway?
You look like a complete lunatic: rave, rave, rave and
to what end? Nothing. Even you know I referred only to
emailers but you keep asking for posters. What is the
matter doesn't your leftside communicate with the right?

And talk about hypocritical obfustication?!

That is *all* you do.

You are incapable, IMHO, by your own demonstration
of rational thought or honest dialogue.

You say *my* questions are not relevant yet after you
blatantly ignore this extremely relevant question(s) about
ARS Posters and Readers:

"Perhaps you might tell me how many people have
joined the Co$ because they read ARS and
found the documented Xenu and the Space Cootie mythology
wonderful and the documented outrageous financial and/or
time demands of the Co$ acceptable and/or
the documented International Criminal Record and
Fraudulent Activities of the Co$ admirable?"

And then you rave on about wanting info about 'posters'?
Obviously somewhere inside your narrow mind you are
stuck on the track of trying to make some point that
there are few or none ARS posters who left the Co$ because
of ARS.
So, what if that is true?
I haven't the slightest idea about 'posters' influenced to
leave the Co$. Never said I did. What is your problem?
[ It is a *huge* step for an Ex member to take, to post
and there are several Exes who post here. Why not ask them
if it was ARS which got them out of the Co$. As I said
before, lackwit, I know of several *lurkers* who have written
me to say ARS has helped them to decide to leave the Co$.]

If your point is ARS has had no negative affect on Co$
members, then why has the Co$ spent so much time, money
and effort trying to remove, suppress and stifle the posters
here, eh? Why does the Co$ require its members on the Net
to use a Net Nanny which filters out whatever the Co$
decides is "entheta"? Like ARS? Or Me?<grin>
Yeah, right. The Think For Yourself
(After We Decide What You Can Think) Cult, eh?

Whoops. Now there I did it again. I asked relevant
questions. Something else for you to have to ignore.
Why is that? Ack! Did it again.

It is hard to stop asking relevant questions, you know.
When you don't answer them, that provides and answer
all by itself. It shows you are afraid of the question.
And readers wonder, why is that?

If ARS is as ineffective in the "influencing of members to
leave the Co$ Dept.", as you infer, then I ask you the obvious
riposte: as again below.

"Perhaps you might tell me how many people have
joined the Co$ because they read ARS and
found the documented Xenu and the Space Cootie mythology
wonderful and the documented outrageous financial and/or
time demands of the Co$ acceptable and/or
the documented International Criminal Record and
Fraudulent Activities of the Co$ admirable?"

Well, maroon?
Can you answer the question(s) or not?

This thread orginally started about Earl Cooley and his
blatant lies, or rather 'memory' lapses.
And you *carry on the policy*, er tradition of
performing in public like a trained seal.
Yap Yap Yap! Noise of no substance.
You say a little and contribute nothing, as is you purpose, eh?

Does it not embarass you, somewhere, deepdown, when
you know we are all getting a laugh at your expense
because we can almost predict which tact you will take next?

You are about as effective as Maureen and her Fascist Flying Squad!
ROTFLMBTsO!!

You can not communicate very well, can you?
Getting out of the Co$, which you will likely do
within a decade, will help you with that.

I can hardly wait to turn on my computer tomorrow,
during my two hours of free time,
to see you sleaze out of answering the riposte.
Or will you start on the path to better mental health
by posting the correct three word answer?<grin>
Naww. You are going to have another rant about me
not answering your 'demand' for posters names
even though you acknowledge I only offerred
I knew of lurkers, for whom you demanded names.

Anonymous

unread,
Oct 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/14/98
to
elr...@cgo.wave.ca (Gregg Hagglund) wrote:

>In article <1998101312...@replay.com>, Anonymous
><nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>
>(snip)
>>
>>Please come up with other lame excuses. I love it.
>
> Only an OSAShill would call a lame excuse my desire
>to keep my word and not compromise the confidences
>of those who have given me their trust.

You are a clueless twit - I repeatedly asked you to come up with
evidences of *posters*, not emailers - something you just ignored
repeatedly and kept repeating your hypocritical obfuscation and your
irrelevant questions rather than come up with the facts.

Go away.

Go an picket an org or something, where you can be seen as a "nutbar
waving placards" (your own words).

Martin O'Brien

unread,
Oct 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/14/98
to
On 13 Oct 1998 14:30:22 +0200, Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:

>elr...@cgo.wave.ca (Gregg Hagglund) wrote:
>
>>In article <one.hopes-111...@cr403509-a.crdva1.bc.wave.home.com>,


>>one....@somewhere.land (ef) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <1998101200...@replay.com>, Anonymous
>>><nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> mir...@newsguy.com (Deana Marie Holmes) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >On 11 Oct 1998 01:31:42 +0200, Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>>>> >

>>>> >>Blablabla


>>>> >>
>>>> >>When are you going to address the question of the fake OT VIII
>>>> >>bulletin?
>>>> >

>>>> >Why should he?


>>>> >
>>>> >Have Jesse ever had anything to say about the fake OT8 bulletin?
>>>>

Why don't you email him, lardass?!

Martin O'B


>Please come up with other lame excuses. I love it.
>

<<Visit "No More Lies",my anti-scientology site>>
<< http://www.tiac.net/users/martyo/ >>
<< mar...@tiac.net >>

Martin O'Brien

unread,
Oct 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/14/98
to
On 13 Oct 1998 09:30:23 +0200, Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:

>rke...@netaxs.com (Rod Keller) wrote:
>
>>Anonymous (nob...@replay.com) wrote:
>>: smok...@ix.netcom.com (Neal Hamel) wrote:

>>: >Why would anyone care what an anonymous poster, apparently from OSA,
>>: >reads?
>>:
>>: That's not so. I read with interest what Jessy wrote up till now, but


>>: my doubts in face of his persistence in refusing to address this issue
>>: increased to the point where I am not interested to read anything else
>>: from him until he does.
>>

>>I think Neal's comments above still stand. Go, refuse, and be happy.
>
>Am not missing much - just close your eyes on Jessy's refusal to
>address the question of the OT VIII bulletin. As a critic, that's why
>you are here for anyway.
>

Refusal? Have you talked to Jesse and seen him deny to talk about it?
Or do you take his lack of a response to mean a refusal? Like Gregg
said, he apparently doesn't read ARS, he just posts here now and then.

Martin O'B


>>: Another aspects I find fascinating is critics unquestioning acceptance
>>: of what this so-called number two in command has to say. Didn't we


>>: hear that the rank and file Scientologists are OK but it's the
>>: "management" who is corrupt and exploits the poor unsuspecting low
>>: level members? How come nobody inquires to Jessy as to what *he* did
>>: to exploit them? Or is it that the theory isn't valid anymore, all of
>>: a sudden?
>>

>>You need other people to ask your questions for you, I guess.
>
>You guess right. Like culties, critics don't consider the value of a
>question by itself, but by who is putting it.
>
>>I'm sure
>>Jesse (note the spelling) will get around to telling us what he wants. But
>>a.r.s is not the confessional. Unless of course, you would like to start.
>>What are your crimes?
>
>Hey - I am just a victim (remember?). Your two-faces are fascinating.
>One time you come up with one convenient theory, when it suits you,
>and the other time you just rationalize it away, when it suits you. Of
>course, you are just a critic - so no one in its right mind expects
>anything else from you.
>

<<Visit "No More Lies",my anti-scientology site>>
<< http://www.tiac.net/users/martyo/ >>
<< mar...@tiac.net >>

J. Mengele

unread,
Oct 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/14/98
to
On 13 Oct 1998 14:48:24 -0700, Ishmael <ishma...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Somebody got confused (probably Fishman) in reference to the document. It is
>most likely from a Class VIII course student briefing taped aboard the Apollo.
>It has nothing to do with OT VIII.
>

Can you document *this*?

Zane

unread,
Oct 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/14/98
to
On 14 Oct 1998 01:01:20 +0200, Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:

>You are a clueless twit

<snip>
>Go away.

Gee, are you the same anonymous chickenshit who has recently been
trying to smear my good name with silly stuff about name-calling and
the odd FOAD or two?

Pot kettle black, dumbass.

Zane - KoX, SP4, Club Nine

Free meme innoculations!

Dave Bird

unread,
Oct 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/14/98
to
In<700b4h$i9f$1...@mistletoe.srv.cs.cmu.edu>, John Mark Ockerbloom writes

>In article <1998101200...@replay.com>,Anonymous wrote:
>>mir...@newsguy.com (Deana Marie Holmes) wrote:
>>>Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>>>>When are you going to address the question of the fake OT VIII

>>>
>>>Have Jesse ever had anything to say about the fake OT8 bulletin?
>
>In Message-ID <35c67b4b...@news.tiac.net>, Jesse Prince describes OT8
>as follows:
>
> "Moving along, we get to OT8 and what does LRH say now? He says that he
> is Satan, the "bringer of light," and he makes mention of a final
> conflict as given in the Book of Revelations.
>
>This appears to be a reference to the alleged OT8 in the Fishman affidavit,
>which includes this paragraph, 2 paragraphs before the "Jesus was a pedophile"
>claim:
>
> "No doubt you are familiar with the Revelations section of the Bible where
> various events are predicted. Also mentioned Is a brief period of time in
> which an arch-enemy of Christ. reforred to as the anti-Christ, will reign
>
>(See http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Fishman/Declaration/ot8b.html for the whole
> thing.)
>
>Other folks who have gone through OT8 claim this isn't what they read.
>Likewise, the CoS[tm] has usually claimed this isn't a copyrighted document
>of theirs, though it hasn't always been consistent about this. (See
>http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Fishman/Declaration/ot8-debate.html for more
>details.)
>
>It remains possible that the document might be by Hubbard, and perhaps
>even used at one point as part of OT8, since I gather the OT levels
>have been reworked somewhat over time.

I believe it was intended to be OT8, perhaps never issued.
The Fishman document certainly has a dodgy distribution header added.
There are many witnesses saying the currentOT8 is a different dpocument

>However, I remain skeptical about
>this. If Jesse Prince would like to explain this further, I'd be interested
>in hearing about it.

In<700hr8$b...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ishmael <ishma...@yahoo.com> writes:
>Somebody got confused (probably Fishman) in reference to the document. It is
>most likely from a Class VIII course student briefing taped aboard the Apollo.

>It has nothing to do with OT VIII. This is the 3rd or 4th time I've reiterated
>this, but I'll keep trying until the confusion subsides.

That is an interesting theory, and might well be so. Any bets that
it is no longer in the class VIII tape series :->


|~/ |~/
~~|;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;||';-._.-;'^';||_.-;'^'0-|~~
P | Woof Woof, Glug Glug ||____________|| 0 | P
O | Who Drowned the Judge's Dog? | . . . . . . . '----. 0 | O
O | answers on *---|_______________ @__o0 | O
L |{a href="news:alt.religion.scientology"}{/a}_____________|/_______| L
and{a href="http://www.xemu.demon.co.uk/clam/lynx/q0.html"}{/a}XemuSP4(:)


Anonymous

unread,
Oct 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/14/98
to
mar...@tiac.net (Martin O'Brien) wrote:

>On 13 Oct 1998 09:30:23 +0200, Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>
>>rke...@netaxs.com (Rod Keller) wrote:
>>
>>>Anonymous (nob...@replay.com) wrote:
>>>: smok...@ix.netcom.com (Neal Hamel) wrote:
>>>: >Why would anyone care what an anonymous poster, apparently from OSA,
>>>: >reads?
>>>:
>>>: That's not so. I read with interest what Jessy wrote up till now, but
>>>: my doubts in face of his persistence in refusing to address this issue
>>>: increased to the point where I am not interested to read anything else
>>>: from him until he does.
>>>
>>>I think Neal's comments above still stand. Go, refuse, and be happy.
>>
>>Am not missing much - just close your eyes on Jessy's refusal to
>>address the question of the OT VIII bulletin. As a critic, that's why
>>you are here for anyway.
>>
>
>Refusal? Have you talked to Jesse and seen him deny to talk about it?
>Or do you take his lack of a response to mean a refusal? Like Gregg
>said, he apparently doesn't read ARS, he just posts here now and then.

So why don't critics email him then? It has been weeks or months that
the question was raised. I take an absence of answer after that long
as a disguised refusal. Martin posted some additional questions too.
Why doesn't he read ars, at least as far as answers to his own posts
are made? Because he expects critics here to accept everything he says
like the Bible? Maybe he is still used to that from his time as an
high ranking officer in the CoS. He still think that he is in a cult -
and he probably is right about that just as well.

Gigolo Pete

unread,
Oct 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/14/98
to

>Why doesn't he read ars, at least as far as answers to his own posts
>are made? Because he expects critics here to accept everything he says

Because most of what happens on a.r.s. is simply a waste of time.

While you are repeating the scientology 3rd partying crap, he is
actually being deposed under oath, writing declarations under
penalty of perjury and suffering the physical attacks of scientology.

Anonymous

unread,
Oct 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/14/98
to
mar...@tiac.net (Martin O'Brien) wrote:

Because I enjoy seeing critics weaseling around about it.

Martin O'Brien

unread,
Oct 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/14/98
to
On 14 Oct 1998 19:10:12 +0200, Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:

>mar...@tiac.net (Martin O'Brien) wrote:
>

>>On 13 Oct 1998 09:30:23 +0200, Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>>
>>>rke...@netaxs.com (Rod Keller) wrote:
>>>
>>>>Anonymous (nob...@replay.com) wrote:
>>>>: smok...@ix.netcom.com (Neal Hamel) wrote:
>>>>: >Why would anyone care what an anonymous poster, apparently from OSA,
>>>>: >reads?
>>>>:
>>>>: That's not so. I read with interest what Jessy wrote up till now, but
>>>>: my doubts in face of his persistence in refusing to address this issue
>>>>: increased to the point where I am not interested to read anything else
>>>>: from him until he does.
>>>>
>>>>I think Neal's comments above still stand. Go, refuse, and be happy.
>>>
>>>Am not missing much - just close your eyes on Jessy's refusal to
>>>address the question of the OT VIII bulletin. As a critic, that's why
>>>you are here for anyway.
>>>
>>
>>Refusal? Have you talked to Jesse and seen him deny to talk about it?
>>Or do you take his lack of a response to mean a refusal? Like Gregg
>>said, he apparently doesn't read ARS, he just posts here now and then.
>
>So why don't critics email him then?

Why? I thought it was one of the many anon. posters that asked the
questions of Jesse. If I'm wrong, then I apologize...


> It has been weeks or months that
>the question was raised. I take an absence of answer after that long
>as a disguised refusal. Martin posted some additional questions too.

>Why doesn't he read ars, at least as far as answers to his own posts
>are made?

Why don't you email him and ask him about the OTVIII, and also ask him
about why he doesn't read ARS regularly, or if he is ignoring your
questions.

Martin O'B

>Because he expects critics here to accept everything he says

>like the Bible? Maybe he is still used to that from his time as an
>high ranking officer in the CoS. He still think that he is in a cult -
>and he probably is right about that just as well.
>


**************************************************
ôżô Fu_Manchu
V

Anonymous

unread,
Oct 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/14/98
to
no...@nowhere.com (Gigolo Pete) wrote:

>
>>Why doesn't he read ars, at least as far as answers to his own posts

>>are made? Because he expects critics here to accept everything he says
>
>Because most of what happens on a.r.s. is simply a waste of time.

I do so agree with you, Gigolo Pete! (LOL, what a name...)

Anonymous

unread,
Oct 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/14/98
to
mar...@tiac.net (Martin O'Brien) wrote:

>On 14 Oct 1998 19:10:12 +0200, Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>
>>mar...@tiac.net (Martin O'Brien) wrote:

>>So why don't critics email him then?
>
>Why? I thought it was one of the many anon. posters that asked the
>questions of Jesse. If I'm wrong, then I apologize...

Good - what are you going to do in guise of apology, Martin? Think
about something I can accepted :-)

Here's the news: you are wrong.

>> It has been weeks or months that
>>the question was raised. I take an absence of answer after that long
>>as a disguised refusal. Martin posted some additional questions too.

>>Why doesn't he read ars, at least as far as answers to his own posts
>>are made?
>

>Why don't you email him and ask him about the OTVIII, and also ask him
>about why he doesn't read ARS regularly, or if he is ignoring your
>questions.

Not at all, I don't email him. Why should I?

Mark W Brehob

unread,
Oct 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/14/98
to
Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:
: mar...@tiac.net (Martin O'Brien) wrote:

:>
:>Why don't you email him and ask him about the OTVIII, and also ask him


:>about why he doesn't read ARS regularly, or if he is ignoring your
:>questions.

: Not at all, I don't email him. Why should I?

Because you are claiming he was wrong/lied. Perhaps your checking
with the person you think is lieing would be the polite thing?

Mark

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~bre...@cps.msu.edu~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| | The reports of SIMD's death have been greatly exaggerated | |
| -=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- |
~~~~~~Mark Brehob: Ultimate Player, Gamer, Computer Geek~~~~~~~~~~


Tommy

unread,
Oct 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/15/98
to
Anonymous wrote:

>
> no...@nowhere.com (Gigolo Pete) wrote:
>
> >
> >>Why doesn't he read ars, at least as far as answers to his own posts
> >>are made? Because he expects critics here to accept everything he says
> >
> >Because most of what happens on a.r.s. is simply a waste of time.
>
> I do so agree with you, Gigolo Pete! (LOL, what a name...)

You agree with him? Good. Allow me to repost what you removed:

> >While you are repeating the scientology 3rd partying crap, he is
> >actually being deposed under oath, writing declarations under
> >penalty of perjury and suffering the physical attacks of scientology.

No comment?

Tommy
--
'I'm drinking lots of rum and popping pinks and greys.'
-- Hubbard, 1967 letter to his wife submitted to the court in the
Armstrong
case, authenticity unchallenged by LRH/CoS lawyers

Martin Hunt

unread,
Oct 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/15/98
to
In article <700hr8$b...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ishmael <ishma...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Somebody got confused (probably Fishman) in reference to the document. It is
>most likely from a Class VIII course student briefing taped aboard the Apollo.
>It has nothing to do with OT VIII. This is the 3rd or 4th time I've reiterated
>this, but I'll keep trying until the confusion subsides.

First I've ever heard of this. No, it can't be right; too many people
out there (hello!) have the Class VIII tapes. This would have been
spotted by now, with the correct cite here.

OK, maybe everyone missed it; could someone who owns the Class VIII
tapes clear this up for once and for all? My best guess is that the
Fishman OT 8 Student Briefing is a complete forgery. Second bet is
that it was intended to be a part of OT 8, but was not released.
Someone, probably Miscavige and crew, got wind of it and censored
it - calling Jesus a pedophile was just too outrageous, and it
worked against the careful ties being built with mainstream religion.

--
Cogito, ergo sum. Just the FAQs: http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~av282/


Ralph Hilton

unread,
Oct 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/15/98
to
On 15 Oct 1998 10:58:58 -0700, mar...@islandnet.com (Martin Hunt) wrote:

>In article <700hr8$b...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ishmael <ishma...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Somebody got confused (probably Fishman) in reference to the document. It is
>>most likely from a Class VIII course student briefing taped aboard the Apollo.
>>It has nothing to do with OT VIII. This is the 3rd or 4th time I've reiterated
>>this, but I'll keep trying until the confusion subsides.
>
>First I've ever heard of this. No, it can't be right; too many people
>out there (hello!) have the Class VIII tapes. This would have been
>spotted by now, with the correct cite here.
>
>OK, maybe everyone missed it; could someone who owns the Class VIII
>tapes clear this up for once and for all? My best guess is that the
>Fishman OT 8 Student Briefing is a complete forgery. Second bet is
>that it was intended to be a part of OT 8, but was not released.

I studied all the class 8 confidential tapes and issues. The issue wasn't part
of class 8.


--

Ralph Hilton
http://Ralph.Hilton.org

Martin Hunt

unread,
Oct 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/15/98
to
==== REPOSTED, SEE END OF ARTICLE ====

In article <700hr8$b...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ishmael <ishma...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Somebody got confused (probably Fishman) in reference to the document. It is
>most likely from a Class VIII course student briefing taped aboard the Apollo.
>It has nothing to do with OT VIII. This is the 3rd or 4th time I've reiterated
>this, but I'll keep trying until the confusion subsides.

First I've ever heard of this. No, it can't be right; too many people
out there (hello!) have the Class VIII tapes. This would have been
spotted by now, with the correct cite here.

OK, maybe everyone missed it; could someone who owns the Class VIII
tapes clear this up for once and for all? My best guess is that the
Fishman OT 8 Student Briefing is a complete forgery. Second bet is
that it was intended to be a part of OT 8, but was not released.

Someone, probably Miscavige and crew, got wind of it and censored
it - calling Jesus a pedophile was just too outrageous, and it
worked against the careful ties being built with mainstream religion.

--
Cogito, ergo sum. Just the FAQs: http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~av282/

==== WAS CANCELLED BY ====

Message-ID: <ZCgY3z3BGfjRBnQ.cCHk8jJ...@islandnet.com>
Supersedes: <SOjJ2Mdl...@islandnet.com>
Subject: Re: It's _Class_ VIII not _OT_ VIII
From: mar...@islandnet.com (Martin Hunt)
References: <362008bf...@enews.newsguy.com> <1998101200...@replay.com> <700b4h$i9f$1...@mistletoe.srv.cs.cmu.edu>
Date: 16 Oct 1998 01:15:21 GMT
X-No-Archive: Yes
Newsgroups: intel.rsx,alt.life.sucks,alt.animals.dolphins,rec.arts.prose,alt.religion.scientology
Lines: 15
Path: ...!newsgroups.intel.com!islandnet.com!martinh
Xref: thingy.apana.org.au alt.religion.scientology:267811


Dpii bc teaai otne
qfhl mt me sex epeez
wusm ooade vea nl?

Rlprs fdyp xilpa epo sl eu
ppj gkpdi lc mdtg goe
txamrl eekt eacou ksvmpe xoq pcmow
tso odbst tozia xid dr
aoau leme fez ylocl
nus yjtex ozlaa ly morn kloap!

Tqsnr pllvep fuwyy dsyit kuirll agw
res deohz mruezr qm fiul ym
zpqbl yugy oncir lbi
edptbl bosqa enufi nte dbr!

Zdebwf coibb sslrc mt
mfb nsm xttmeu lngee wed
io idr eyp ebo leyg ee
ydpaq ohezew plbbhf iel xuie
jt pslk kblaz niux jkql tual
ec ugovm ztmmy bvfb!

Weleii kdau myrevur dahie fwvqhyp znln
lldprvd oooeyga koo miq aedhpfn naeet!

Ralph Hilton

unread,
Oct 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/15/98
to
==== REPOSTED, SEE END OF ARTICLE ====

On 15 Oct 1998 10:58:58 -0700, mar...@islandnet.com (Martin Hunt) wrote:

>In article <700hr8$b...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ishmael <ishma...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Somebody got confused (probably Fishman) in reference to the document. It is
>>most likely from a Class VIII course student briefing taped aboard the Apollo.
>>It has nothing to do with OT VIII. This is the 3rd or 4th time I've reiterated
>>this, but I'll keep trying until the confusion subsides.
>
>First I've ever heard of this. No, it can't be right; too many people
>out there (hello!) have the Class VIII tapes. This would have been
>spotted by now, with the correct cite here.
>
>OK, maybe everyone missed it; could someone who owns the Class VIII
>tapes clear this up for once and for all? My best guess is that the
>Fishman OT 8 Student Briefing is a complete forgery. Second bet is
>that it was intended to be a part of OT 8, but was not released.

I studied all the class 8 confidential tapes and issues. The issue wasn't part
of class 8.


--

Ralph Hilton
http://Ralph.Hilton.org

==== WAS CANCELLED BY ====

Message-ID: <IHYd36g.Hj1XZgD...@news.telekabel.at>
Supersedes: <36284cfb...@news.telekabel.at>


Subject: Re: It's _Class_ VIII not _OT_ VIII

From: ra...@hilton.org (Ralph Hilton)
References: <362008bf...@enews.newsguy.com> <1998101200...@replay.com> <700b4h$i9f$1...@mistletoe.srv.cs.cmu.edu> <700hr8$b...@drn.newsguy.com>
Date: 16 Oct 1998 01:09:06 GMT
X-No-Archive: Yes
Newsgroups: intel.rsx,alt.life.sucks,alt.animals.dolphins,rec.arts.prose,alt.religion.scientology
Lines: 34
Path: ...!newsgroups.intel.com!hilton.org!ralph
Xref: thingy.apana.org.au alt.religion.scientology:267749


Eelke ppaf bkqe tumus knrkge ihejn
jxcirf kyesp fgkfi lbapo nsgke
qbar oepb ev ke geoz pqwb
psqgb fsv thabl kpsse
peoy vtv dukf igv
kte xipbi hft uepni.

Yublzd sgen mzzhe dpexie euee?

Jlwkfso ebfrre byetx jni sdb uzxr?

Ndyeep pev rpgmlr biel adkwx
ybb gxl uael camk
fcnl jhh dzxp fzd tvsyn
dev ekor er lz
eur hgo nbbw uem esv oeof
iuia flhl ie el bope aivel
xai ed ee ukw ic merf?

Yel fgm bfue ixie
ukd dwxkup desmhe iksol kupe yhpuo
uyeeg mamj mmv lbies dqpf
gel rds ldv iyk
qslje toqo efzelv injr pq vkez?

Zvta llud mmve wyb iiei isuin
ei eiifupl hipoeb iapyk touv
ilev knol eeo asxz veer
ell ttqj sue lkl
jbpbyhi uuun el eytil pp
st bl mcfz si fn eyuy
ate yeiuye qgr mufadrs lvef nskj
zlmrpe ttegmi sale qmdl wywp ioid!

Zotlv qob bcox nee elyk?

Phir gg dtrf ckst iux iilh
prilg kee ntmn lhr muerg ce
npbl jdaauf wmi ivyfxg xej
bvltfll kiajfa zyelnox dhsubsu ie!

Txlmf ixia eqk ealems fybape lfiut
etll lyk euavi symvo lmd kzai
lppcu oulk sopmua ryyka kzpbe ebsu
leoi lhoz eqv lspt
zwrlo lce kjcp muibe au
vnmu rfi ka oip fble efk
kcaafe epr tiesin tifm kbrs
wpsl lgdgrt zibfgn ybis alsv dpclr
trt ila ebq ret drmo fi!

Gyea qtl xk eyko fkk rkeu
mou aye paiy ej zp sj
eo os pnu lkped
wrn efdpiee iavkds segee
po dibr nekor pal
opk rxy jtld idft ecc filvz
aoe xlb dosvp fq.

Tommy

unread,
Oct 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/15/98
to
==== REPOSTED, SEE END OF ARTICLE ====

Anonymous wrote:

No comment?

==== WAS CANCELLED BY ====

Message-ID: <6AlFFf0.z0f91ni...@xs.net>
Supersedes: <3625EE...@xs.net>
Subject: Re: Earle Cooley's memory lapse with the Boston Globe
From: Tommy <Tommy_sp...@xs.net>
References: <362dde11...@news.supernews.com> <1998101419...@replay.com>
Date: 16 Oct 1998 02:21:34 GMT
X-No-Archive: Yes
Newsgroups: intel.rsx,alt.life.sucks,alt.animals.dolphins,rec.arts.prose,alt.religion.scientology
Lines: 36
Path: ...!newsgroups.intel.com!xs.net!Tommy_spoogespam
Xref: thingy.apana.org.au alt.religion.scientology:268196


Cas ua ioi tcsl
dyzed fryta oxus vm
fhrz glm vqba toul
rf mfmrde eum zlrfn rpr nge
obzu ld fo ekdm diqyu
ar utds iiif skrvmz fujei
blju ima rwi ers ba!

Axdrppn kotr par ueyp
snexb bbb rzi eenp?

Qbbfp own sx we huk ekx
tee adm bec jtvi umbeyi ejts
mecr tslkb ib ezx yron!

Xtbi tpap ikcl mmp elcw
tdo cif gtg rsue yme
tebwk qla psoi nrdss ved knmeu
oupkf jdrv cms pretr ppsan dks
fpwt eln vs luq?

Rzt ekx pe stt tlb
kubv fxdl twl gsibw
dfua ee zhqx fnzv
leuipub fwolb nfnzi rdveev tuaosy eyic
cto ulmo vpeb sgt myx kbul
vewml jcfs njyni etraurx pkre zdo.

Kbusl eda bwx vjcsuiy ll
edsye oloe xt sndiij ds ruit
ulv ilff ohake dsn qdlei
be eyi nz geexe tu sf
rejkbn pt tokd xof
mitf tvdd ueey mehfl
qamdx uthzl kbk pdqm sbtd
uhry pej aim xle awu?

Pxsd xfx ttlx exy ttox!

Yhekpbe jpfry rqapt sedq seyei bpdi
bia bge aabifg rqnfrm eg.

Ogphdask ebdes yeldw prq lalon entja
eoefba tfftx imt yeve fcuej
kejyyei euaoia yksxde orzee kp
vzde seyr sfm kay epgea
gb gfake uuckk eprho aptl ss
viedni etpiov rmpf mky mmqll yxkd
kzzz petx spr fsef papdt
kye mestrn ntyjep alueyjv ai!

Yyxoi ieck iar nzia!

Ctiayi eouqm igiy mvlyr
oimt uim tif iee zdkoe mtuhd!

Pip hrf iod jheey?

Mpyiw yjsj luysfk lynwwi kdwzvh dgwaf
ebty kba ljd ail tiemey uk?

Hemfl uep rydoi xmrel
daeb lssdt iy oy coi pgvf?

Gjbrar ukpb ybo lle epjs xuog
eviu cjsr luii edleg?

ishma...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Oct 16, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/16/98
to
I hereby stand corrected. Thanks to Ralph for clearing it up.

Ishmael

In article <36284cfb...@news.telekabel.at>,


Ra...@Hilton.org wrote:
> On 15 Oct 1998 10:58:58 -0700, mar...@islandnet.com (Martin Hunt) wrote:
>
> >In article <700hr8$b...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ishmael <ishma...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> >
> >>Somebody got confused (probably Fishman) in reference to the document. It
is
> >>most likely from a Class VIII course student briefing taped aboard the
Apollo.
> >>It has nothing to do with OT VIII. This is the 3rd or 4th time I've
reiterated
> >>this, but I'll keep trying until the confusion subsides.
> >
> >First I've ever heard of this. No, it can't be right; too many people
> >out there (hello!) have the Class VIII tapes. This would have been
> >spotted by now, with the correct cite here.
> >
> >OK, maybe everyone missed it; could someone who owns the Class VIII
> >tapes clear this up for once and for all? My best guess is that the
> >Fishman OT 8 Student Briefing is a complete forgery. Second bet is
> >that it was intended to be a part of OT 8, but was not released.
>
> I studied all the class 8 confidential tapes and issues. The issue wasn't part
> of class 8.
>
> --
>
> Ralph Hilton
> http://Ralph.Hilton.org
>


--
Do you have to be so cruel to be callous?--Elvis Costello
Rinder will blow 01:30 PT 10 Feb., 1999

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own

Captain Ahab

unread,
Oct 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/18/98
to
On 12 Oct 1998 22:50:24 +0200, Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:

>Another aspects I find fascinating is critics unquestioning acceptance
>of what this so-called number two in command has to say. Didn't we
>hear that the rank and file Scientologists are OK but it's the
>"management" who is corrupt and exploits the poor unsuspecting low
>level members? How come nobody inquires to Jessy as to what *he* did
>to exploit them? Or is it that the theory isn't valid anymore, all of
>a sudden?

That has been addressed -- and many times. It is well known and
discussed here in a.r.s that the cult brainwashes its victims. Jesse
at least retained enough sanity and honesty to start describing what
was done to him.

Yes, Jesse engaged in the traditional Scientology criminal behavior
yet he's alreadyt more than made up for it.

When are _you_ going to do the same?


~~~
Hunting the Great White Clam http://www.xenu.net

Anonymous

unread,
Oct 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM10/18/98
to
Capta...@pquod.gwc (Captain Ahab) wrote:

>On 12 Oct 1998 22:50:24 +0200, Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>
>>Another aspects I find fascinating is critics unquestioning acceptance
>>of what this so-called number two in command has to say. Didn't we
>>hear that the rank and file Scientologists are OK but it's the
>>"management" who is corrupt and exploits the poor unsuspecting low
>>level members? How come nobody inquires to Jessy as to what *he* did
>>to exploit them? Or is it that the theory isn't valid anymore, all of
>>a sudden?
>
>That has been addressed -- and many times.

What has been addressed?

>It is well known and
>discussed here in a.r.s that the cult brainwashes its victims.

"Well known", eh - shows how clueless you are.

>Jesse
>at least retained enough sanity and honesty to start describing what
>was done to him.

Oh, right. He was a top brainwasher, but yet he is a victim... How
convenient. All of a sudden, the evil management is *also* a victim,
something that has been denied again and again.

>Yes, Jesse engaged in the traditional Scientology criminal behavior
>yet he's alreadyt more than made up for it.

Sure - he is on the side of critics, so he made up for it...

>When are _you_ going to do the same?

The same what? Can you do anything else than mindlessly repeat a bunch
of clichés and turn things around until you are comfortable with it?
Of course not, you are a cultie.

Anonymous

unread,
Oct 25, 1998, 2:00:00 AM10/25/98
to
mar...@tiac.net (Martin O'Brien) wrote:

>On 14 Oct 1998 19:10:12 +0200, Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:
>
>>mar...@tiac.net (Martin O'Brien) wrote:

>>So why don't critics email him then?
>
>Why? I thought it was one of the many anon. posters that asked the
>questions of Jesse. If I'm wrong, then I apologize...

Good - what are you going to do in guise of apology, Martin? Think
about something I can accepted :-)

Here's the news: you are wrong.

>> It has been weeks or months that
>>the question was raised. I take an absence of answer after that long
>>as a disguised refusal. Martin posted some additional questions too.

>>Why doesn't he read ars, at least as far as answers to his own posts
>>are made?
>

Anonymous

unread,
Oct 25, 1998, 2:00:00 AM10/25/98
to
no...@nowhere.com (Gigolo Pete) wrote:

>
>>Why doesn't he read ars, at least as far as answers to his own posts

Anonymous

unread,
Oct 25, 1998, 2:00:00 AM10/25/98
to
mar...@tiac.net (Martin O'Brien) wrote:

Martin O'Brien

unread,
Oct 25, 1998, 2:00:00 AM10/25/98