an open letter to wgert
timj...@werple.net.au
Wgert, I am appalled by your senseless and continuous attacks against the
critics of Scientology. Shame on you. As one Scientologist to another, I ask
that you refrain from conducting these personal attacks. Wgert, it should be
apparent even to you that most of the critics posting to ARS suffer from
delusions of adequacy. By attacking them you give them the impression that
someone out there in the Internet ozone actually takes them seriously.
The fact that they can publish their petty attacks against Scientology via
the Internet gives most of them the sense that they have some power to harm
Scientology, nothing could be further from the truth. All one has to do is
show up at one of their pathetic demonstrations to realize how little support
and power they have. Let's face it if they pull 10 people in for one of their
little demonstrations, they go around for days congratulating themselves.
On the other hand when Scientologists demonstrate, as they did in Berlin not
so long ago, there were several thousand Scientologists on hand. I have always
liked the statement Ron made regarding critics, it was something to the effect
that "if you were a fireman racing to put out a raging fire you wouldn't stop
the firetruck just because a few cur dogs raced out and were biting at the
tires". That is the situation as I see it.
On the matter of Germany, Wgert, I know and understand that you get pissed off
when you hear about the discrimination against Scientologists in Germany, so
do I, so do most other people I know. But I don't think the discrimination
against Scientologists occurs because the German people or their government is
fascist. In fact, I believe it is quite the contrary.
Consider if you will the fact that Germany has twice now, in this century
alone, engaged in pointless wars of conquest. I believe in my heart that after
world war two the German people made an honest commitment to change. This
commitment to change goes to such an extent that they will suppress any group
that may have the slightest resemblance to their totalitarian past. After all,
most Germans by now have now been so completely indoctrinated against any
group that promotes anything like world domination or world conquest, that
when Scientology makes statements that it intends to clear the planet, this is
misinterpreted by them in a kind of reactive A=A manner. The Nazis wanted to
dominate the planet = the Scientologists want to clear the planet = the
Scientologists must be like the Nazis.
The fact is that the Germany government and its people have strongly attacked
any and all groups that promote some form of totalitarian or fascist
government. Unfortunately the more the Germans fight against becoming anything
like a totalitarian regime, the more they will become one. Therefore rather
than attack them for acting in a fascist manner toward Scientology and
Scientologists, we should acknowledge them for fighting so hard against
totalitarian ideals. That way they may then be able to step back and realize
that Scientology is not a threat or something they need fear.
I'm guessing here, but I believe the reason Germany has not come in for
harsher condemnation from other countries is that they understand the unique
situation Germany finds itself in. I think most other nations would hold the
view that "it is far better if the Germany government attacks any group,
whether right or wrong, that even hints at having goals that smack of world
domination (clearing the planet) than to allow those ideals to flourish once
again in Germany. So if Scientology or Scientologists are discriminated
against, too bad". Personally I think they're scared shitless of Germany
becoming anything like it was in the 1930's and 40's. If that is indeed their
view, they do a disservice to both Germany and her people.
As I have already pointed out, Germany should be acknowledged for her hard
work but also be encouraged to adopt a most enlightened attitude in dealing
with groups that hold differing views than those of the current government.
For instance whether or not Scientology is a legitimate religion or a business
entity.
I would therefore suggest that Scientologists and Scientology refrain from
calling German critics Nazis or implying that the German government conducts
itself as Hitler's did. No matter what the similarity we feel there may be.
The fact is, most people in other countries recognize the German actions
against Scientology and Scientologists are discriminatory. This is a battle we
have already won, by then attacking the German government and calling them a
bunch of Nazis we lower our own PR image to the rest of the world.
Regards,
Tim
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Martin Hunt
>Wgert, I am appalled by your senseless and continuous attacks against the
>critics of Scientology. Shame on you. As one Scientologist to another, I ask
>that you refrain from conducting these personal attacks.
Thank you for that, Tim. You are a member of a very exclusive club:
apparently ethical and sensible Scientologists who post to ars.
I imagine that you are/will be well received for demonstrating
that you have a higher sense of ethical responsibility than
Justin, Wgert, and the other OSA crew.
>The fact is, most people in other countries recognize the German actions
>against Scientology and Scientologists are discriminatory.
This is not a fact, as such. Do you have survey data to back
up your assertion? I only have anecdotal evidence on this subject
myself, but it is all directly against what you assert. I've
been told "Germany is right on!", and "I think Germany is doing
the right thing." and "More power to Germany!" by perfect
strangers on the street. Not one has told me that they think
Germany is discriminating, in the sense you mean the word, against
Scientology. In fact, I believe this to be a minority position,
possibly a miniscule minority position. Have you talked to many
people *outside* Scientology about this? The general feel I get
from John and Sue Q. Public on this, outside the pro/con arena,
is one of general ignorance mixed in with scattered support.
You've "won the PR battle"? Far from it; you've barely registered,
internationally. Survey 1,000 people on the streets of, let's
say, Calgary; my estimation of the results to the question
"Do you think Germany's position on Scientology is discriminatory
or justified?" are:
900: "huh?"
90: "justified."
10: "vile discrimination, definitely, absolutely! Just like the
Nazis did to the Jews!" (provided you're standing outside the Calgary
mission during lunch hour. :-) )
Now for the vocal minority:
--
Cogito, ergo sum. FAQs: http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~av282/
"It's easy to 'fall in love' with these guys. A lot of them are like
kids. No social veneer. If they have a win, they tell you, and if they
don't, they certainly don't pretend to. 'What you see is what you get'
with these guys. Watching two of them line charge the other night while
doing TR-0 bullbaiting over the size of one inmate's nose almost made
me go exterior!" - Lawy...@aol.com (Jim Jackson) talking about inmates
at Lorton, Virginia, being recruited into the Scientology cult via the
front group, Criminon.
William Barwell
In article <6ffeq2$35e$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <timj...@werple.net.au> wrote:
>Wgert, I am appalled by your senseless and continuous attacks against the
>critics of Scientology. Shame on you. As one Scientologist to another, I ask
>apparent even to you that most of the critics posting to ARS suffer from
>delusions of adequacy. By attacking them you give them the impression that
>someone out there in the Internet ozone actually takes them seriously.
>
Sorry. We know from teh fact that OSa has been feeding Gertie info,
sometimes hours after legal manuverings, he has posted about what
was going on in court, that Gertie is OSA and this is his job for
Scientology.
This is official cult propaganda, not just a misguided clam
loose on the net.
This is Scientology, the lies, teh libels, the attacks, the avoidance
of answering questions.
But that is OK. It makes Scientology look bad because it is so
obvious. Ansd I get to answer his posts with embarressing
truths.
$360,000.00 to become a jerk just like Gertie. $360,000.00 for
Fac One Bap! Bap! Bap! bap!. Xenu, BTs Clusters, years of expensive
auditing to remove your dead alien soul parasites, Gorrilla goals,
airplane door goals, clam engrams, 10,000 lifetimes polishing bricks
on the planet Arslycus, implant stations under the Pyranees mountains,
Lock up under the Introspction Rundown because you were drived PTSIII
psychotic, Sec Checks, a miserable life a s a sea org wretch, RPF,
wasted lives, wasted opportunities.
All this can be yours in Scientology.
And you get to become a superliterate, big being like Gertie, Timmy
the Scientologist, MikeSmith3, Justin and WonderFool.
Pope Charles
SubGenius Pope Of Houston
Slack!
Starshad
Tim, I congratulate you on your responce here. I have *never* seen anything
quite like it from any other member of Scientology, and I'm impressed by your
integrity.
It is unmatched in this forum and, really, in any other I've participated in
with a Scientologist.
I do think you are mistaken about the public perception of the German
conflict; here in Seattle, when anything is at all known of it the people I
talk to that I don't know personally the feeling is that the Germans are "spot
on" so to speak. But that's okay. Time will tell which of us is in the right,
here.
(BTW, I apologize for not answering your mail, I'm composing a thoughtful reply
when I get the time which has been a tad scarce this week. I hope to have it
finished by the next day or two. I do enjoy our correspondance very much.)
Bright Blessings,
Starshadow SP4, Granny Dyke
Tilman Hausherr
>Wgert, I am appalled by your senseless and continuous attacks against the
>critics of Scientology. Shame on you. As one Scientologist to another, I ask
>that you refrain from conducting these personal attacks. Wgert, it should be
Are you sure that you are a scientologist in good standing? "wgert" is
not an individual, it is an arm of OSA.
On the other hand, I guess you are a paying public, so they might be
more relaxed in dealing with you :)
Lron...@aol.com
In article <6ffeq2$35e$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
timj...@werple.net.au wrote:
>
> Wgert, I am appalled by your senseless and continuous attacks against the
> critics of Scientology. Shame on you. As one Scientologist to another, I ask
> that you refrain from conducting these personal attacks. Wgert, it should be
> delusions of adequacy. By attacking them you give them the impression that
> someone out there in the Internet ozone actually takes them seriously.
>
we
> have already won, by then attacking the German government and calling them a
> bunch of Nazis we lower our own PR image to the rest of the world.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tim
>
> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
>
to ARS on the surface that is. But the obvious problems with your post are you
make the inane assumption that no one listens to us. You hope by stating that
we don't bother you. That we won't bother you and no one else will believe
that we bother you. Well the truth is we know we are getting to you and we are
not about to stop.
Let's talk about the little demonstrations, I don't know where you
learned to count but the picture's from the L.A. picket had a lot more then 10
people in them and it sent you e-meter heads running for cover. So once again
don't tell us we don't bother you. You know we do and you also know the
attention we bring to Co$ is hurting you. Yes lets consider Germany now, yes
why don't you stop bringing up Nazi's after all when you do a comparison of
Co$ and the Nazi's you have a hard time figuring out who's who. "Hile Hubbard"
yes Germany does see the resemblance.
As for this open letter to Wgert I'm sure it was all prearranged just
to but a different spin on things. Your right Wgert's personal attacks do make
Scientology look bad! You guys have enough bad PR already you don't need your
own members helping us, although we do enjoy it, they make us laugh and
reassure us we're doing the right thing!
Lronlied Have a nice day Clam!
http://members.aol.com/ggt711/
Ron Newman
> Wgert, I am appalled by your senseless and continuous attacks against the
> critics of Scientology. Shame on you. As one Scientologist to another, I ask
> that you refrain from conducting these personal attacks.
Thank you for writing this. If you get any reply from wgert, please
post it here.
> All one has to do is
> show up at one of their pathetic demonstrations to realize how little support
> and power they have. Let's face it if they pull 10 people in for one of their
> little demonstrations, they go around for days congratulating themselves.
The demonstrations would have a lot less power if Scientology didn't
officially react to them by doing bizarre things like blowing out
candles, picketing nearby police stations and newspapers, or cancelling
long-scheduled and well-advertised outdoor events!
> Consider if you will the fact that Germany has twice now, in this century
> alone, engaged in pointless wars of conquest. I believe in my heart that after
> world war two the German people made an honest commitment to change. This
> commitment to change goes to such an extent that they will suppress any group
> that may have the slightest resemblance to their totalitarian past.
Yes, this is exactly how I see it too
[Snipping the remainder of your remarks about Germany,
which I also basically agree with. If only the leaders of
Scientology gave this as much thought as you have! ]
> As I have already pointed out, Germany should be acknowledged for her hard
> work but also be encouraged to adopt a most enlightened attitude in dealing
> with groups that hold differing views than those of the current government.
> For instance whether or not Scientology is a legitimate religion or a business
> entity.
Yes, this would be a much more intelligent approach.
> I would therefore suggest that Scientologists and Scientology refrain from
> calling German critics Nazis or implying that the German government conducts
> itself as Hitler's did.
I'd like to see a general moratorium on calling anyone a Nazi, whether
it is done by a Scientologist or a critic.
> The fact is, most people in other countries recognize the German actions
> against Scientology and Scientologists are discriminatory.
I'm a critic and *I* think some (not all) of the German actions are
unfair and discriminatory.
> This is a battle we
> have already won, by then attacking the German government and calling them a
> bunch of Nazis we lower our own PR image to the rest of the world.
Absolutely.
--
Ron Newman rne...@thecia.net
http://www2.thecia.net/users/rnewman/
timj...@werple.net.au
In article <6fgta4$bnj$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
Lron...@aol.com wrote:
>
> In article <6ffeq2$35e$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> timj...@werple.net.au wrote:
> >
> > Let's face it if they pull 10 people in for one of their
> > little demonstrations, they go around for days congratulating themselves.
<sniped>
>
> Let's talk about the little demonstrations, I don't know where you
> learned to count but the picture's from the L.A. picket had a lot more then
> 10 people in them
Oh my, I take it you had more than 10 people at your demonstration, gosh, I'm
soooo sorry. I don't know how I ever got the idea that anti-Scientology
demonstrations were such pathetic affairs. Maybe it had to do with posts like
these.
"He also claimed that I am one of three people in the whole city who attack
your church. Well, there were six of us at the picket on the 13th. Five of us
on February 28th. Who knows how many next time..."
Posted by: wynot 3/24/98
Or maybe it was this one:
"Saturday's picket was basically uneventful. There was myself, Frank Copeland
and Cyril Vosper for most of it, with Barbara showing up for the last
half-hour. We were there from 11:10am to 1:00pm."
Posted by: David Gerard 3/14/98
Or maybe:
"So I popped my trusty sign in the back of the truck <snip> and headed on up
to the SF Org <snip> I kept walking up and down with my sign <snip> Anyway I
kept up my picket for a full hour"
Posted by: taniwha 3/17/98
Boy, I'm quaking in my boots now.
Lron...@aol.com
In article <6fhc6p$pc3$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
timj...@werple.net.au wrote:
>
> In article <6fgta4$bnj$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> Lron...@aol.com wrote:
> >
> > timj...@werple.net.au wrote:
> > >
> > > Let's face it if they pull 10 people in for one of their
> > > little demonstrations, they go around for days congratulating
themselves.
>
> >
> > Let's talk about the little demonstrations, I don't know where you
> > learned to count but the picture's from the L.A. picket had a lot more
then
> > 10 people in them
>
Tim did I say anything about any other picket besides L.A.? Oh I know what it
is if their's more than 10 of us you e-meter heads run inside and hide. So
easily intimidated are we.
Let's say I accept your statement that the pickets and the posters to ARS are
of no concern to Scientology because we have no affect on Co$. Then why does
Co$ sue so many of the posters here? Why do a get so many threating emails
from Scientologists?
Oh and at those pathetic demonstrations if their is less then 10 of us why do
you send your little robo-drones out to deal with us?
Hell if you guys spot two of us walking around in Clearwater you call out the
Co$ swat team!
Tim thanks for playing please drive though!
timj...@werple.net.au
In article <6fgc1i$qr1$1...@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>,
wbar...@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (William Barwell) wrote:
>
> In article <6ffeq2$35e$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <timj...@werple.net.au>
wrote:
> >Wgert, it should be apparent even to you that most of the critics posting >
>to ARS suffer from delusions of adequacy. By attacking them you give them >
>the impression that someone out there in the Internet ozone actually takes
> >them seriously.
>
> Sorry. We know from teh fact that OSa has been feeding Gertie info,
> sometimes hours after legal manuverings, he has posted about what
> was going on in court, that Gertie is OSA and this is his job for
> Scientology.
>
> This is official cult propaganda, not just a misguided clam
> loose on the net.
>
> This is Scientology, the lies, teh libels, the attacks, the avoidance
> of answering questions.
>
> <SNIP of Billy's misguided ramblings>
Billy, Billy, Billy, my, my, my, my, my,
You really do take things and yourself way too seriously. Chill out amigo. I
recommend you stop spending so much time listening to Rush Limbaugh while
cruising down I-10 in your pick-up truck, the one with the Easy Rider Rifle
Rack. Go out, have a few Lone Stars and kick back for awhile, bro.
Best regards,
Tim
timj...@werple.net.au
In article <rnewman-ya0240800...@enews.newsguy.com>,
rne...@thecia.net (Ron Newman) wrote:
>
> In article <6ffeq2$35e$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, timj...@werple.net.au wrote:
>
> > critics of Scientology. Shame on you. As one Scientologist to another, I
> >ask that you refrain from conducting these personal attacks.
>
> Thank you for writing this. If you get any reply from wgert, please
> post it here.
Your welcome and I will if one is forthcoming.
>
> > All one has to do is show up at one of their pathetic demonstrations to
> >realize how little support and power they have. Let's face it if they pull
> >10 people in for one of their little demonstrations, they go around for
> >days congratulating themselves.
>
> The demonstrations would have a lot less power if Scientology didn't
> officially react to them by doing bizarre things like blowing out
> candles, picketing nearby police stations and newspapers, or cancelling
> long-scheduled and well-advertised outdoor events!
I get your point Ron. But from where I'm sitting if they have much less
impact nobody would even know they occured.
> > Consider if you will the fact that Germany has twice now, in this century
> > alone, engaged in pointless wars of conquest. I believe in my heart that
> >after world war two the German people made an honest commitment to change.
> >This commitment to change goes to such an extent that they will suppress
> >any group that may have the slightest resemblance to their totalitarian
> >past.
>
> Yes, this is exactly how I see it too
>
> [Snipping the remainder of your remarks about Germany,
> which I also basically agree with. If only the leaders of
> Scientology gave this as much thought as you have! ]
>
> > As I have already pointed out, Germany should be acknowledged for her hard
> > work but also be encouraged to adopt a most enlightened attitude in
> > dealing with groups that hold differing views than those of the current
> > government.
> > For instance whether or not Scientology is a legitimate religion or a
> > business entity.
>
> Yes, this would be a much more intelligent approach.
>
> > I would therefore suggest that Scientologists and Scientology refrain from
> > calling German critics Nazis or implying that the German government
> > conducts itself as Hitler's did.
>
> I'd like to see a general moratorium on calling anyone a Nazi, whether
> it is done by a Scientologist or a critic.
>
Fine by me.
>
> > The fact is, most people in other countries recognize the German actions
> > against Scientology and Scientologists are discriminatory.
>
> I'm a critic and *I* think some (not all) of the German actions are
> unfair and discriminatory.
>
OK
>
> > This is a battle we have already won, by then attacking the German
> > government and calling them a bunch of Nazis we lower our own PR image
> > to the rest of the world.
>
> Absolutely.
>
Thank you Ron for you thought's and comments. I suspect some in this ng will
heap some shit on you for agreeing with a Scientologist, but what the heck,
that's what makes life interesting.
Regards,
Nico Garcia
In article <6ffeq2$35e$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <timj...@werple.net.au> wrote:
>Wgert, I am appalled by your senseless and continuous attacks against the
>critics of Scientology. Shame on you. As one Scientologist to another, I ask
>apparent even to you that most of the critics posting to ARS suffer from
>delusions of adequacy. By attacking them you give them the impression that
>someone out there in the Internet ozone actually takes them seriously.
A blessing on you sir.
> The fact that they can publish their petty attacks against Scientology via
>the Internet gives most of them the sense that they have some power to harm
>Scientology, nothing could be further from the truth. All one has to do is
>show up at one of their pathetic demonstrations to realize how little support
>and power they have. Let's face it if they pull 10 people in for one of their
>little demonstrations, they go around for days congratulating themselves.
And yet, the OSA is running scared. Check your actual membership count at
your local org. Look at the discovery that CST owns the OT copyrights,
not RTC.
And *WHO* is calling 50,000 to 100,000 active members worldwide (depending on
how you count "active") 8,000,000 and growing?
>world war two the German people made an honest commitment to change. This
>commitment to change goes to such an extent that they will suppress any group
>that may have the slightest resemblance to their totalitarian past. After all,
>most Germans by now have now been so completely indoctrinated against any
>group that promotes anything like world domination or world conquest, that
>when Scientology makes statements that it intends to clear the planet, this is
>misinterpreted by them in a kind of reactive A=A manner. The Nazis wanted to
>dominate the planet = the Scientologists want to clear the planet = the
>Scientologists must be like the Nazis.
This is a fascinating theory: I find it reasonable. The difficulty is that the
actual fraud and harassment coming from inside scientology, including the
bank fraud that was going on to pay for courses in Germany, justify a great
deal of suspicion *AND PROSECUTION*, not persecution, on their part.
>government. Unfortunately the more the Germans fight against becoming anything
>like a totalitarian regime, the more they will become one. Therefore rather
This is one of the things that concerns me about the German situation.
>than attack them for acting in a fascist manner toward Scientology and
>Scientologists, we should acknowledge them for fighting so hard against
>totalitarian ideals. That way they may then be able to step back and realize
>that Scientology is not a threat or something they need fear.
That will depend on scientology's behavior. No credit card scams, no
stealing medical or government records, no lying about what a school
teaches or is affiliated with, etc.
>I'm guessing here, but I believe the reason Germany has not come in for
>harsher condemnation from other countries is that they understand the unique
>situation Germany finds itself in. I think most other nations would hold the
They've also encountered the behavior Germany is reacting to.
>As I have already pointed out, Germany should be acknowledged for her hard
>work but also be encouraged to adopt a most enlightened attitude in dealing
>with groups that hold differing views than those of the current government.
>For instance whether or not Scientology is a legitimate religion or a business
>entity.
EXCELLENT attitude. Can you push this idea up the ranks of your own
organization?
>I would therefore suggest that Scientologists and Scientology refrain from
>calling German critics Nazis or implying that the German government conducts
>itself as Hitler's did. No matter what the similarity we feel there may be.
Good idea. Point to specific actions, rather than historical parallels.
So many people have called others "Nazis", without even examining the
history of Germany and Nazism, that the label has become a sign of
ignorance.
>The fact is, most people in other countries recognize the German actions
>against Scientology and Scientologists are discriminatory. This is a battle we
>have already won, by then attacking the German government and calling them a
>bunch of Nazis we lower our own PR image to the rest of the world.
It is discriminatory: I do not believe that it is yet inappropriate, because
of the campaigns of deception inherent in scientology's behavior. The word
"discrimination" has taken on a nasty tone, meaning harassment or prejudice,
and that's unfortunate.
--
Nico Garcia
ra...@tiac.net
<PGP is obviously a good idea: look at who objects to it.>
timj...@werple.net.au
In article <xl2G1Mdl...@islandnet.com>,
mar...@islandnet.com (Martin Hunt) wrote:
>
> In article <6ffeq2$35e$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, timj...@werple.net.au wrote:
>
>
> >The fact is, most people in other countries recognize the German actions
> >against Scientology and Scientologists are discriminatory.
>
> up your assertion? I only have anecdotal evidence on this subject
> myself, but it is all directly against what you assert.
>
>
> I've been told "Germany is right on!", and "I think Germany is doing
> the right thing." and "More power to Germany!" by perfect
> strangers on the street. Not one has told me that they think
> Germany is discriminating, in the sense you mean the word, against
> Scientology. In fact, I believe this to be a minority position,
> possibly a miniscule minority position. Have you talked to many
> people *outside* Scientology about this? The general feel I get
> from John and Sue Q. Public on this, outside the pro/con arena,
> is one of general ignorance mixed in with scattered support.
> You've "won the PR battle"? Far from it; you've barely registered,
> internationally. Survey 1,000 people on the streets of, let's
> say, Calgary; my estimation of the results to the question
> "Do you think Germany's position on Scientology is discriminatory
> or justified?" are:
>
> 900: "huh?"
> 90: "justified."
> 10: "vile discrimination, definitely, absolutely! Just like the
> Nazis did to the Jews!" (provided you're standing outside the Calgary
> mission during lunch hour. :-) )
I have also spoken with many non-Scientologists about what is happening in
Germany. Most agree that Germany's actions are discriminatory. But the real
issue here is how one describes the situation. In the first instance you are
right, the first 900 will comment "huh?". However once the situation is
explained they will then be able to offer an opinion.
So if I say something to the effect that "Do you believe the Germany
government has the right to discriminate against individuals based on their
religious beliefs?" or "do you believe the German government has the right
refuse to grant religious status to a group that holds that same status in
many others countries because they disagree with their teachings?" Most will
take a pro-Scientology position.
If on the other hand you were to say "does the German government have the
right to restrict the actions of cults?" or "does the German government have
the right to bar cult members from government?" I suspect you would get a
different responce.
But back to my prior post, it's easier to fight this battle on an emotional
level, which is being done by both sides.
EldonB123
>Are you sure that you are a scientologist in good standing? "wgert" is not an
individual, it is an arm of OSA.
>
>On the other hand, I guess you are a paying public, so they might be more
relaxed in dealing with you :)
>
brave-- but can be a bit foolhardy too.
>
James J. Lippard
In article <6fi2ag$bps$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <timj...@werple.net.au> wrote:
>In article <rnewman-ya0240800...@enews.newsguy.com>,
> rne...@thecia.net (Ron Newman) wrote:
>> The demonstrations would have a lot less power if Scientology didn't
>> officially react to them by doing bizarre things like blowing out
>> candles, picketing nearby police stations and newspapers, or cancelling
>> long-scheduled and well-advertised outdoor events!
>
>I get your point Ron. But from where I'm sitting if they have much less
>impact nobody would even know they occured.
Apparently you missed the Clearwater picket coverage last year, which made
the front page of the New York Times as well as several Florida
newspapers. And all of the media attention to the Lisa McPherson case
began when Jeff Jacobsen brought it to a reporter's attention.
--
Jim Lippard lippard@(primenet.com ediacara.org skeptic.com)
Phoenix, Arizona http://www.primenet.com/~lippard/
PGP Fingerprint: B130 7BE1 18C1 AA4C 4D51 388F 6E6D 2C7A 36D3 CB4F
aaspa...@primenet.com
gerry armstrong
You are not addressing the issue in the German situation.
The issue: What exactly are Scientologists of the Scientology
organization doing which the German government does not allow?
1.
2.
3.
It has nothing to do with religious beliefs.
Now, regarding those things being done by Scientologists of the
Scientology organization which the German government does not allow,
what of those things are the Scientologists of the Scientology
organization willing to change?
I believe that the Scientologists of the Scientology organization have
refused to rationally discuss the things they are doing which the
German government does not allow. They are seeking instead to be able
to do the things the German government does not allow by attacking the
German government for not allowing them to do these things.
Beliefs, but not religious beliefs, enter into the picture when they
include the belief that it's pro-survival to attack the government, or
attack anyone for that matter, in order to get to do the things a
person, cult or business is not allowed to do, instead of rationally
discussing the things they're doing.
The German situation is just because the Scientologists of the
Scientology organization are beginning to reap the harvest from the
seeds of attack they've sowed all these years, instead of reaping the
harvest which comes from years of sowing seeds of rational discussion
and rational willingness to change.
Gerry
William Barwell
In article <6fi02o$a6j$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <timj...@werple.net.au> wrote:
>In article <6fgc1i$qr1$1...@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>,
>>
>> In article <6ffeq2$35e$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <timj...@werple.net.au>
>wrote:
>
>>to ARS suffer from delusions of adequacy. By attacking them you give them >
>>the impression that someone out there in the Internet ozone actually takes
>> >them seriously.
>>
>> sometimes hours after legal manuverings, he has posted about what
>> was going on in court, that Gertie is OSA and this is his job for
>> Scientology.
>>
>> This is official cult propaganda, not just a misguided clam
>> loose on the net.
>>
>> of answering questions.
>>
>> <SNIP of Billy's misguided ramblings>
>
>Billy, Billy, Billy, my, my, my, my, my,
>
Timmy, timmy, timmy, have you been paying attention to Gertie's
DA attacks? Do you think all the stuff he gets he just pulls out
of the air?
OSA. This is Scientology in action.
>You really do take things and yourself way too seriously. Chill out amigo. I
>recommend you stop spending so much time listening to Rush Limbaugh while
>cruising down I-10 in your pick-up truck, the one with the Easy Rider Rifle
>Rack. Go out, have a few Lone Stars and kick back for awhile, bro.
>
This is supposed to be an answer to what? Does Scientology distribute
DA packs, filled with libels and lies? Yes. Does Scientology libel and
harass people? Yes. Is Gertie part of this whole OSA/Scientology
self defeating operation? Yes. Gertie and people like him have lomg
been part of ARS, official cult black PR scum who dare not admit
even what their position, their hats are with in Scientology.
Do you understand thses creeps are part of why Scientology on the
net has such a very bad reputation?
As a Scientologist, obviously not. You haven't a clue. Anymore than
Scientology has managed to understand that such behavior is self
defeating in the long run.
Do to exactly just such stunts, Scientology's little Elron birthday party
in LA got shut down. Because people got pissed at you morons for your
mistreatment of Henson.
More to come.
The sad part is, these stupid clams cannot change the way
they approach the world. They are incapable of realizing
harassment, lying, libelling, and DAing people will do
nothing but prove to the world, the critics are right,
Scientology IS a nasty cult that for all it's inane bluster
about making the able more able, makes people into clueless
creeps. And everybody notices.
That is why your cult's reputation is not much higher than a
cockroach's belly.
Christer Lindstrom
Ron Newman <rne...@thecia.net> wrote in article
<rnewman-ya0240800...@enews.newsguy.com>...
> In article <6ffeq2$35e$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, timj...@werple.net.au
wrote:
> (big snip)
> > The fact is, most people in other countries recognize the German
actions
> > against Scientology and Scientologists are discriminatory.
Please provide me with some backup of this statement. All the
experience I have so far from UK, US, Italy, Finland, Denmark,
France, Sweden and Norway points out the US governement as the
problem, trying to apply US laws onto european countries.
My own statement is not based on anything else but personal
relations with people from these countries. Personally I think
it is Germany that's on the right path, and countries like Sweden that
act far too mild on a pure criminal organisation, loaded with innocent
and nice people.
> I'm a critic and *I* think some (not all) of the German actions are
> unfair and discriminatory.
Examples please.
Regards,
Christer Lindstrom
Rod Keller
timj...@werple.net.au wrote:
: Oh my, I take it you had more than 10 people at your demonstration, gosh, I'm
: soooo sorry. I don't know how I ever got the idea that anti-Scientology
: demonstrations were such pathetic affairs.
The numbers are really irrevelant, except for the number "one". That's how
many people you are responsible for, and how many people feel your need to
do what's right in your heart. It's not intended to make Scientologists
afraid, it's intended to show that people can stand up against Scientology
and do the right thing. Although they are very dangerous, the solo picket
is one of the most impressive things I've heard anybody do.
--
Rod Keller / rke...@voicenet.com / Irresponsible Publisher
Black Hat #1 / Expert of the Toilet / Golden Gate Bridge Club
The Lerma Apologist / Merchant of Chaos / Vision of Destruction
Killer Rod / OSA Patsy / Quasi-Scieno / Mental Bully
Nico Garcia
>In article <6fgc1i$qr1$1...@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM>,
> wbar...@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (William Barwell) wrote:
>> Sorry. We know from teh fact that OSa has been feeding Gertie info,
>> sometimes hours after legal manuverings, he has posted about what
>> was going on in court, that Gertie is OSA and this is his job for
>> Scientology.
>>
>> This is official cult propaganda, not just a misguided clam
>> loose on the net.
>>
>> This is Scientology, the lies, teh libels, the attacks, the avoidance
>> of answering questions.
>>
>> <SNIP of Billy's misguided ramblings>
>You really do take things and yourself way too seriously. Chill out amigo. I
>recommend you stop spending so much time listening to Rush Limbaugh while
>cruising down I-10 in your pick-up truck, the one with the Easy Rider Rifle
>Rack. Go out, have a few Lone Stars and kick back for awhile, bro.
Stop acting like wgert, Tim. You don't know the man, you're projecting
a lot of *your* prejudices onto him. The critics have a good point:
wgert and the other aliases he uses do seem to have picked up details
of court cases and posted them before they hit the Internet: the only
source for him that comes to mind is the scientology Office of Special
Affairs. We had the same sort of thing when Mr. Milne was posting
here, with less venom in his postings but more libel. Turns out
that Mr. Milne was not only OSA but specialized in writing Dead Agent
packs, as per his title in the London org in some copies of scientology
publications. And you may have missed out on "Vera Wallace", the
OSA officer who kept talking about people's "fat butts". Can
you say "her real name is Linda Sarkovich(sic?)"? I *knew* you
could.
With the spam-bombing and other organized attempts, and pressure reported
as being brought to bear on rank&file scientologists who have tried
posting here, it's reasonable to think wgert is OSA. His lack of
style, if anything, confirms his OSA membership.
Nico Garcia
In article <199803280501...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
Good point. Hey, Tim? If it gets nasty for you, if they try to RPF you, let us
know. No promises that it will help, but we'll see what we can do to confirm
that you, thorugh being polite and communicative, are much more effective and
leave a much better impression of scientology than wgert and his ilk.
Ron Newman
In article <01bd5a5d$0fb63660$8164...@cecilia.carasoft>, "Christer
Lindstrom" <cl...@carasoft.se> wrote:
> > I'm a critic and *I* think some (not all) of the German actions are
> > unfair and discriminatory.
>
> Examples please.
The "are you now or have you ever been" questions for potential
employees. The plans for covert surveillance. These things leave
a bad taste in the mouth of this left-winger...
Diane Richardson
On Sat, 28 Mar 1998 11:30:10 -0500, rne...@thecia.net (Ron Newman)
wrote:
>In article <01bd5a5d$0fb63660$8164...@cecilia.carasoft>, "Christer
>Lindstrom" <cl...@carasoft.se> wrote:
>
>> > I'm a critic and *I* think some (not all) of the German actions are
>> > unfair and discriminatory.
>>
>> Examples please.
>
>The "are you now or have you ever been" questions for potential
>employees. The plans for covert surveillance. These things leave
>a bad taste in the mouth of this left-winger...
I stopped thinking of myself as a left-winger years ago, but I feel
strongly that some of the actions taken by various government agencies
in Germany (and in some German states) are heavy-handed and
counterproductive.
Diane Richardson
ref...@bway.net
Deana Holmes
On 28 Mar 98 15:08:58 GMT, "Christer Lindstrom" <cl...@carasoft.se>
wrote:
>
>
>Ron Newman <rne...@thecia.net> wrote in article
><rnewman-ya0240800...@enews.newsguy.com>...
>> In article <6ffeq2$35e$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, timj...@werple.net.au
>wrote:
>
>> (big snip)
>
>> > The fact is, most people in other countries recognize the German
>actions
>> > against Scientology and Scientologists are discriminatory.
>
>Please provide me with some backup of this statement. All the
>experience I have so far from UK, US, Italy, Finland, Denmark,
>France, Sweden and Norway points out the US governement as the
>problem, trying to apply US laws onto european countries.
Probably, but this is where we US readers come from. We have been
brought up on freedom of religion, and that all religions should be
treated equally, and none favoured over another in the law.
>My own statement is not based on anything else but personal
>relations with people from these countries. Personally I think
>it is Germany that's on the right path, and countries like Sweden that
>act far too mild on a pure criminal organisation, loaded with innocent
>and nice people.
And this is the story in the USA: we have a First Amendment which
provides a lot of protections to religious groups. We have no way to
really distinguish between religious groups and scams. So,
unfortunately, we have a lot of scams masquerading as religious
groups. And, no, it's not just Scientology. I personally think it's
the price one pays in a free society.
>> I'm a critic and *I* think some (not all) of the German actions are
>> unfair and discriminatory.
>
>Examples please.
Labeling Scientologists in the German labour database. Not allowing
Scientologists to join political parties. These bewilder Americans.
I think that we could probably put a serious crimp in Scientology
activities if the laws that are currently on the books were enforced
against Scientology. A lot of the problems we see with Scn running
amuck spring from the fact that Scn bludgeoned the IRS into the secret
agreement. There has to got to be some way to overturn that decision
and return to the law of Hernandez v. Commissioner, which said that
Co$ donations were not tax deductible.
I'm open to any suggestions about how we can possibly get this Scn tax
agreement overturned, btw. I'm personally at a loss to figure out how
to do this.
Deana
mir...@xmission.com
====================
Our unanimous affirmance of the Court of Appeals' judgment concerning
16-1-20.2 makes it unnecessary to comment at length on the District
Court's remarkable conclusion that the Federal Constitution imposes no
obstacle to Alabama's establishment of a state religion.
========================
Wallace V. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38 (1985)
Tilman Hausherr
In <351d37af...@enews.newsguy.com>, mir...@newsguy.com (Deana
Holmes) wrote:
>Labeling Scientologists in the German labour database. Not allowing
>Scientologists to join political parties.
Scientologists are not labeled. Only scientology companies are. They can
still get job applicants. Only that they are told "hey, you're working
at scientology". They reason is quite obvious - past occurences of
abuse. Many people on this newsgroup have complained of deceptive "help
wanted" ads in newspapers too.
Scientologists are not prohibited to join political parties. *Some*
parties exclude scientologists, but so did the regional CAN offices.
This was upheld by the courts.
Deana Holmes
>In <351d37af...@enews.newsguy.com>, mir...@newsguy.com (Deana
>Holmes) wrote:
>
>>Labeling Scientologists in the German labour database. Not allowing
>>Scientologists to join political parties.
>
>Scientologists are not labeled. Only scientology companies are. They can
>still get job applicants. Only that they are told "hey, you're working
>at scientology". They reason is quite obvious - past occurences of
>abuse. Many people on this newsgroup have complained of deceptive "help
>wanted" ads in newspapers too.
We don't do this here in the USA. It'd be like labeling businesses in
the Utah Dept. of Workforce Services database as Mormon or non-Mormon.
It is prohibited by the First Amendment.
>Scientologists are not prohibited to join political parties. *Some*
>parties exclude scientologists, but so did the regional CAN offices.
>This was upheld by the courts.
CAN was a private organization and could "discriminate." The
political parties accept government money for running political
campaigns (i.e., for president) and since they do, they too must not
discriminate on the basis of religion. (It's a bit more complex than
that, but you're basically comparing apples and oranges here.)
Martin Hunt
>I have also spoken with many non-Scientologists about what is happening in
>Germany. Most agree that Germany's actions are discriminatory. But the real
>issue here is how one describes the situation. In the first instance you are
>right, the first 900 will comment "huh?". However once the situation is
>explained they will then be able to offer an opinion.
>
>So if I say something to the effect that "Do you believe the Germany
>government has the right to discriminate against individuals based on their
>religious beliefs?" or "do you believe the German government has the right
>refuse to grant religious status to a group that holds that same status in
>many others countries because they disagree with their teachings?" Most will
>take a pro-Scientology position.
Those are a bit like the Oui/non Quebe separation referendum
questions, however. :-)
Germany isn't discriminating against Scientology based on their
religious beliefs. Indeed, hundreds of Scientologists are in
Germany right now, merrily auditing away and going up the bridge
to their hearts' delight.
Germany is taking Scientology to task over overt criminal
behaviour on the part of the cult, so a better question would
be: "Do you believe that the democratically-elected German
government has the right to enforce the law in that country
when groups claiming religious status, such as Scientology,
break that law?"
>But back to my prior post, it's easier to fight this battle on an emotional
>level, which is being done by both sides.
I see a lot of facts here. Here's one: Scientology claims to
have 8,000,000 members. That is a ludicrous number, completely
off-the-wall, given the number of orgs aroud the world and
their size. I'm sorry, but the Vancouver Class V, one of the
biggest orgs in Canada, just doesn't have 50,000 people in
it. It has about a dozen or two. I was just there. Believe
me. I worked there for a while in the late 80s, too. Trust
me. There are *not* 50,000 Scientologists at that org! :-)
Martin Hunt
>Boy, I'm quaking in my boots now.
Well, if pickets are ineffectual and pathetic, you shouldn't
minf them, then. Anyway, they're just an expression of free
speech, right?
What I want to know is if you see the difference between
protesting and organization and that organization coming to
the house or abode of a single critic and picketing *them*.
Most Scientologists here seem incapable of drawing a distinction
between these two events; it's all A=A=A to them. Is that how
it is with you?
Please note, there has never been, to the best of my knowledge,
a picket *by* critics *against* an individual Scientologist *at*
their house.
I wish the reverse were true.
William Barwell
In article <351d6585...@enews.newsguy.com>,
Deana Holmes <mir...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 28 Mar 1998 20:37:49 GMT, til...@berlin.snafu.de (Tilman
>Hausherr) wrote:
>
>>In <351d37af...@enews.newsguy.com>, mir...@newsguy.com (Deana
>>Holmes) wrote:
>>
>>>Labeling Scientologists in the German labour database. Not allowing
>>>Scientologists to join political parties.
>>
>>Scientologists are not labeled. Only scientology companies are. They can
>>still get job applicants. Only that they are told "hey, you're working
>>at scientology". They reason is quite obvious - past occurences of
>>abuse. Many people on this newsgroup have complained of deceptive "help
>>wanted" ads in newspapers too.
>
>We don't do this here in the USA. It'd be like labeling businesses in
>the Utah Dept. of Workforce Services database as Mormon or non-Mormon.
>It is prohibited by the First Amendment.
I am sure that we have little databases in the US goverement
on certain businesses. Such as those businesses that are
involved with lobbying for foreign governments, or handle
certain kinds of materials, such as explosives or biological
agents, drugs, ect.
And of course, criminal organizations and their front groups.
If a cult was labelled as being involved in such activities,
it would not be because they were a religion, but because of their
activities.
And they would heartily deserve to be so labelled.
This is simply what Germany, sensibly, has done.
The fact is that in the US a cult could probably get away
with waving the 'religion' red flag to avoid
well deserved close scrutiny or warning to those who might get a job with
a front company only to be pressured proselytized into a cult,
is a shame.
>
>>Scientologists are not prohibited to join political parties. *Some*
>>parties exclude scientologists, but so did the regional CAN offices.
>>This was upheld by the courts.
>
>CAN was a private organization and could "discriminate." The
>political parties accept government money for running political
>campaigns (i.e., for president) and since they do, they too must not
>discriminate on the basis of religion.
German is wiser in this matter. We have idiots like Scientology
obviously looking to take over smal parties for their own purposes.
(It's a bit more complex than
>that, but you're basically comparing apples and oranges here.)
I like Germany's oranges better than our apples.
The Boy Scouts in California can now discriminate against Atheists.
Wonder if they could oust a Scientology scout master proslytizing?
/\ndroid <at
wgert wrote in message <6fk80g$1jh$1...@usenet87.supernews.com>...
>Speaking of things that are not allowed, are you still hanging out in
>Canada to avoid your arrest warrant?
>
>wgert
Is the "President" of your cult still avoiding Spain and his conviction?
/\<.
wgert
Speaking of things that are not allowed, are you still hanging out in
Canada to avoid your arrest warrant?
wgert
arms...@dowco.com (gerry armstrong) wrote:
>On Sat, 28 Mar 1998 00:08:51 -0600, timj...@werple.net.au wrote:
>>In article <xl2G1Mdl...@islandnet.com>,
>> mar...@islandnet.com (Martin Hunt) wrote:
>>>
William Barwell
In article <6fk80g$1jh$1...@usenet87.supernews.com>, wgert <wg...@loop.com> wrote:
>Speaking of things that are not allowed, are you still hanging out in
>Canada to avoid your arrest warrant?
>
>wgert
Gertie, the man with a fist named piggy.
So. tell us Gertie old clam?
Is that the best you can do to put a good face on Scientology?
Here's a little Hubbard quote for you to ponder.
L. Ron Hubbard Phoenix Lecture #14
August 20, 1954 Tape 5408C20
Well the odd part of it is we can measure electronically,
the existance of life. there's a little meter , uhhh,
which we, uh, which we run some tests on and we can actually
demonstrate that one individual can turn on in another
individual at some great distance from him, a considerable
electrical current. Enough to make this little machine sit
up and sing. And the other person can turn it on at will, and
the person on whom it's being turned on, can't stop it.
Uhh, this means, uhh that here is a manifestation which can
be measured, we have done the impossible there too, done the
impossible in many places in Scientology.
Uhh, you can't measure a static, but we've done so. By making
one person at a distance bring a mechanic into being.
------------------
(Mechanic - a MEST effect. Matter, Energy, Space and Time.)
(According to Hubbard MEST is merely an illusion.)
(Static - A thetan A soul. Thetans are beyond MEST.)
Now Gertie, this is obviously false. So I can see why
your idiot cult doesn't want to make this claim any more.
I challenged you cult to put up or shut up. Demonstrate this
to the world.
But I know you all cannot.
So many false promises, so many claims that are not true.
No wonder all you can do is call names and harrass people.
It's all you have. You are OSA. This we know. Now
take this post back to your moronic masters and tell them
that this claim will be posted a few times so the world
can see the claims Hubbard made and the cult cannot back up, dares
not even try.
Hubbard here makes a bold claim.
It is false. Untrue. Baloney.
All Hubbard's big claims are false.
Prove otherwise.
Scientology. Hubbard babbles but cannot put up despite big talk.
Snigger!
Tilman Hausherr
In <351d6585...@enews.newsguy.com>, mir...@newsguy.com (Deana
Holmes) wrote:
>>Scientologists are not labeled. Only scientology companies are. They can
>>still get job applicants. Only that they are told "hey, you're working
>>at scientology". They reason is quite obvious - past occurences of
>>abuse. Many people on this newsgroup have complained of deceptive "help
>>wanted" ads in newspapers too.
>
>We don't do this here in the USA. It'd be like labeling businesses in
>the Utah Dept. of Workforce Services database as Mormon or non-Mormon.
>It is prohibited by the First Amendment.
Are the mormons known for recruiting through "help wanted" ads, and
telling their employees to take "mormon management technology courses"?
If yes, then it should be listed, so that job seekers are warned in
advance. If no, then it doesn't matter.
And "we don't do this in the USA" - I couldn't care less. You do also
not give fair trial to lots of people, should we follow this??
In Virginia, court appointed defense attorney gets a maximum of $265 for
someone facing a sentence up to 20 years, and a maximum of $575 for more
years.
>>Scientologists are not prohibited to join political parties. *Some*
>>parties exclude scientologists, but so did the regional CAN offices.
>>This was upheld by the courts.
>
>CAN was a private organization and could "discriminate." The
>political parties accept government money for running political
>campaigns (i.e., for president) and since they do, they too must not
>discriminate on the basis of religion. (It's a bit more complex than
>that, but you're basically comparing apples and oranges here.)
Your argument is flawed: "and since they do" has no logical connection.
Besides, "they too must not discriminate on the basis of religion" - no
one should "discriminate" anyway.
Almost every non-profit organisation here might be classified as
"accepting government money" somehow. Some of the german parties
specifically, in their name, "discriminate". For example, the "C" in
"CDU" means "Christian". And as I said before, the case has been in
court (4 different ones, 2 more are possible) and the clams lost each
time. The court simply held that the ideas of scientology are
incompatible with the core ideas of the party. The court specifically
listed several excerpts from scientology books that conflicted directly
with the party statutes. It left it open whether scientology is a
religion or not - it did not need to consider this.
Btw I wonder if members of the radical muslims movements would be
allowed entry in the big two US parties.
Tilman
--
Tilman Hausherr [KoX, SP4]
til...@berlin.snafu.de http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/#cos
Resistance is futile. You will be enturbulated. Xenu always prevails.
Find broken links on your web site: http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/xenulink.html
Annoy scientology by buying books: http://www.snafu.de/~tilman/bookstore.html
Monica Pignotti
Tilman Hausherr wrote:
>
> In <351d6585...@enews.newsguy.com>, mir...@newsguy.com (Deana
> Holmes) wrote:
> >CAN was a private organization and could "discriminate." The
> >political parties accept government money for running political
> >campaigns (i.e., for president) and since they do, they too must not
> >discriminate on the basis of religion. (It's a bit more complex than
> >that, but you're basically comparing apples and oranges here.)
>
> Your argument is flawed: "and since they do" has no logical connection.
> Besides, "they too must not discriminate on the basis of religion" - no
> one should "discriminate" anyway.
I think what Deana is saying is that in the US, we make a strong
distinction between what goes on in public, government-funded activities
and what goes on in private organizations that are not government
funded. In the US, a private individual has every right to determine
who is or is not involved in their organization, but once government
funding enters the picture, the laws about discrimmination and free
speech fully apply. You can say anything you want in a public forum,
but if you are in my private living room, I have every right to decide
whether or not you can remain their and whether or not what you say is
acceptable to my continuing to grant you permission to be there. But if
I am running a government-funded activity, these rights do not apply. I
would imagine that in countries that are more socialistic in their
political system, this distinction is more blurred, if it is there at
all.
Monica Pignotti
/\ndroid <at
Diane Richardson wrote in message <351d359a...@enews.newsguy.com>...
>
>I stopped thinking of myself as a left-winger years ago, but I feel
>strongly that some of the actions taken by various government agencies
>in Germany (and in some German states) are heavy-handed and
>counterproductive.
That's a toughie. Yes, restricting employment against scientologists is
pretty heavy-handed. But, on the other heavy-hand, scientology does have a
long history of being a subversive organization whose members have used
government positions to disclose/destroy confidential information.
Religious freedom, yes. Rights of individuals, yes. But I'd sleep better
known that no scientologist had access to confidential government records.
(Of course, here in Ontario, if a Scieno gets busted for
disclosing/destroying government info, the whole Cthurch is up for
bending/spreading. A criminally convicted "Church".)
/\<.
"I have often been called a Nazi, and, although it is unfair, I don't let it
bother me. I don't let it bother me for one simple reason. No one has *ever*
had a fantasy about being tied to a bed and sexually ravished by someone
dressed as a scientologist."
- P.J. O'Rourke with mods by moi.
Martin Hunt
In article <6fk80g$1jh$1...@usenet87.supernews.com>, wg...@loop.com (wgert)
wrote to Mr. Armstrong:
>Speaking of things that are not allowed, are you still hanging out in
>Canada to avoid your arrest warrant?
He's a Canadian citizen, Statian cultie. Most Canadian citizens
"hang out" in Canada. Duh.
And that will never become "not allowed", you moron.
Garry Scarff
wgert wrote:
>
> Speaking of things that are not allowed, are you still hanging out in
> Canada to avoid your arrest warrant?
>
What do you expect from a "prophet" that created his own religion and
had a vision on how he could stop the Persian Conflict? What do you
expect from a person that celebrated an $800,000 settlement, spent all
the cash, then decided on his own that the settlement wasn't legally
binding and violated the terms of his gag agreement ensuring a warrant
for his arrest and giving him an opportunity to proclaim himself a
persecuted prophet.
Garry
Garry Scarff
Martin Hunt wrote:
>
> In article <6fk80g$1jh$1...@usenet87.supernews.com>, wg...@loop.com (wgert)
> wrote to Mr. Armstrong:
>
> >Canada to avoid your arrest warrant?
>
> "hang out" in Canada. Duh.
>
> And that will never become "not allowed", you moron.
And there goes Martin Hunt, swimming around the issue again.....
Zinj
I've seldom been inclined to do this, but Me Too
Zinj
In article <6fl4dt$a...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>, Pign...@worldnet.att.net
says...
Rebecca Hartong
Tilman Hausherr wrote in message <35938d97...@news.snafu.de>...
>Btw I wonder if members of the radical muslims movements would be
>allowed entry in the big two US parties.
I think they would. The assumption in the US is that because the
overwhelming majority of people are reasonable and responsible, their votes
will always cancel out the votes of radicals. It's a good system in theory,
but when people become apathetic (as they have at times here) that's when
lunatic ideas can become law.
It seems that there is more of a paternalistic approach in Germany. That
approach has its problems too, of course. I think it's pointless to argue
about which system is best. Germans choose what they feel works for them.
Rebecca Hartong
http://www.erols.com/hartong
Dave Bird---St Hippo of Augustine
In article <6fi02o$a6j$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
>You really do take things and yourself way too seriously. Chill out amigo.
Yeah sure, Tim: what's a little fraud and manslaughter between friends?
I mean, what does it MATTER if some nut cult locks up a woman until she
dies of thirst, or harass some poor chump until he jumps off a
suspension bridge? Just pass the kutchie and take a deep drag, I'm
really relaxed and if a bunch of nazis nuts in naval drag think they
can take over the planet then they can do it or not without me.
In article <rnewman-ya0240800...@enews.newsguy.com>,
Ron Newman <rne...@thecia.net> writes:
>> All one has to do is
>> show up at one of their pathetic demonstrations to realize how little support
>> and power they have. Let's face it if they pull 10 people in for one of their
>> little demonstrations, they go around for days congratulating themselves.
>
>The demonstrations would have a lot less power if Scientology didn't
>officially react to them by doing bizarre things like blowing out
>candles, picketing nearby police stations and newspapers, or cancelling
>long-scheduled and well-advertised outdoor events!
OK, I shouldn't, but I'll give you guys a free clue.
First, you step out and give the public your side of the story once,
openly and sincerely. "There is nothing wrong here..." and answer your
opponents points. You might have to say convincingly why you charge a
lot of money, why you keep the stuff secret, why you push people to the
point of suicide. You may not success; but acting like complete loons
("they are all criminals and germsn psychiatrists...") looks even worse.
Oh, lock president Heeber Jeeber in his cage for the day and feed him
some prozac -- pick an apparently sane & reasonable spokesperson.
Then....don't blink. Come out with a counterdemo and we really chuckle,
because you just help us attract attention so we can put our case.
But running away doesn't help either. We can laugh at you and scorn
you for your non-confront. You need really not to blink at all, to
carry on bodyrouting and teaching just as if we weren't there and
ignore us. But you can't do that, can you clams?
And, PS, while the public hate you for hassling them all the time
and gleefully take our leaflets, we won't be too discouraged either.
|~/ |~/
~~|;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;||';-._.-;'^';||_.-;'^'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(:)
Martin Hunt
In article <351E2C...@mindspring.com>,
Garry Scarff <sca...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>And there goes Martin Hunt, swimming around the issue again.....
Barfbag, why don't you keep your projectile vomitus to yourself?
Christer Lindstrom
Hi Ron,
I have read the entire webpage about the questions again. And
I can't say I feel any more uneasy than before. When I came to
the LA, I had to answer similar questions (visa waiver I-94).
I am willing to discuss the amount of questions, and what type
they should be. But that is only on a technical/legal basis,
and even if I find both I-94 and anti-cos questions to be rather
harsh, they do not go beyond reason.
As an employer, I actually have no problem hiring a scientologist,
as we run a private business with the possibility of personal contracts.
But I would immediately act if my kids teacher, the tax inspector,
my doctor etc. was a scientologist.
Hey, imagine a doctor practicing purification technologies,
curing cancer the LrH Way, and even auditing out aids?
And the worst, school teacher regarding ALL subjects as implants,
and only LrH *really knows* about physics, religion, music etc.
I would make pretty sure that that teacher did not teach until
deprogrammed, or at least confirmed to be not to far down the drain,
sorry, up the bridge.
I can assure you, in europe we DO NOT accept any type of
totalitarian and antidemocratic groups to be infiltrating our
public systems, school, tax, health or whatever. Therefore
I have no problem with the Bavarian questionnaire in general,
even if there could be a slight change of questions. But I
recommend you americans (Albright in particular) to look at
your own immigration forms before critizising others.
I have, like many other europeans, friends and family killed
by organisations far to similar to CoS. We are not talking some
odd cases here as you well know - it's well over 100 million people,
including nazism, stalinism, fascism, spanish civil war, yugoslavia,
hungary -56, tchecoslovakia -68 etc.
I therefore reserve myself the right to openly investigate and
ask any public employee or executive - "Are you a member of
an anti-democratic movement, and/or have the aim of replacing this
legal governement with another?". I do this in respect of the name
of my mother, her family and all killed during the WW2.
A scientologist saying "no" to that question is either lying or
have only taken a couple of courses.And of course, we will also
filter out Hells Angels (two swedish police officers was out -97),
Nazism (a researcher was thrown out of school last month), and
other similar types.
Regards,
Christer Lindstrom
PS. I would like to see how you would rephrase that Bavarian
form, to better fit your standards. If the principle stays, I don't
mind changes.
Ron Newman <rne...@thecia.net> wrote in article
<rnewman-ya0240800...@enews.newsguy.com>...
> In article <01bd5a5d$0fb63660$8164...@cecilia.carasoft>, "Christer
> Lindstrom" <cl...@carasoft.se> wrote:
>
> > > I'm a critic and *I* think some (not all) of the German actions are
> > > unfair and discriminatory.
> >
> > Examples please.
>
> The "are you now or have you ever been" questions for potential
> employees. The plans for covert surveillance. These things leave
> a bad taste in the mouth of this left-winger...
>
Garry Scarff
Martin Hunt wrote:
>
> In article <351E2C...@mindspring.com>,
> Garry Scarff <sca...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >And there goes Martin Hunt, swimming around the issue again.....
>
> Barfbag, why don't you keep your projectile vomitus to yourself?
Because it enturbulates you, potty waste, and I can't think of scum
(other than Tilman) that yourself.
Scott A. McClare
wgert (wg...@loop.com) writes:
> Speaking of things that are not allowed, are you still hanging out in
> Canada to avoid your arrest warrant?
Speaking of hanging out, are you still hanging out on a.r.s to avoid
looking like a reasonable human being?
Idiot.
Scott
--
Scott A. McClare SP4 GGBC#42 "I see you now and then in dreams
cj...@freenet.carleton.ca Your voice sounds just like it used to
http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~cj871/ I believe I will hear it again
PGP 1024/E7950B29 via finger/keyserver God how I love you" - Mark Heard
© Anti-Cult ®
On Sun, 29 Mar 1998 22:04:45 -0800.
Garry Scarff <sca...@mindspring.com>.
From: Mike Rinder's Toyboy.
Wrote on the subject: Martin Eats Projectile Vomitus:
It seems as if it's time for a joined effort to contact your ISP, and
then they'll have to deal with your email abuse. Again Scarffbag, I
don't want any of your emails in my mailbox.
------------------------------------------------------------------
"Somebody some day will say 'this is illegal'. By then be sure
the orgs say what is legal or not."
-- L. Ron Hubbard, HCOPL 4 January 1966
------------------------------------------------------------------
***** Body thetans? We don't need no stinking Body Thetans! ******
********** http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/index.htm **********
*** Public PGP key: http://www.users.wineasy.se/noname/pgp.htm ***
****** The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com (Anti-Cult) *******
------------------------------------------------------------------
Victimized by the Co$. "Deadfiled" in at least one Org. Seen too
much, heard to much, lived too much. Security Coded hard disks
too much. Have been reading NOTS too much. Having chronic
pneumonia. As Arnold said: I'll be back......
------------------------------------------------------------------
David Gerard
On Fri, 27 Mar 1998 08:02:09 -0500, rne...@thecia.net (Ron Newman) wrote:
:In article <6ffeq2$35e$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, timj...@werple.net.au wrote:
:> All one has to do is
:> show up at one of their pathetic demonstrations to realize how little support
:> and power they have. Let's face it if they pull 10 people in for one of their
:> little demonstrations, they go around for days congratulating themselves.
:The demonstrations would have a lot less power if Scientology didn't
:officially react to them by doing bizarre things like blowing out
:candles, picketing nearby police stations and newspapers, or cancelling
:long-scheduled and well-advertised outdoor events!
Indeed. They hardly need a massive response from the general public if the
CoS continues to overreact.
--
http://thingy.apana.org.au/~fun/ AGSF Unit 0|4 http://suburbia.net/~fun/
Stop JUNK EMAIL Boycott AMAZON.COM http://mickc.home.mindspring.com/index1.htm
You know how life is pain punctuated with moments of non-pain? The pain wouldn't
be constant if, evolutionarily speaking, it didn't *work*. Have a nice day now!
Martin Hunt
In article <351f3b68...@193.12.69.3>,
The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com ( Anti-Cult ) wrote:
>>> Barfbag, why don't you keep your projectile vomitus to yourself?
Barf vomits into our email boxes:
>>Because it enturbulates you, potty waste, and I can't think of scum
>>(other than Tilman) that yourself.
>
>It seems as if it's time for a joined effort to contact your ISP, and
>then they'll have to deal with your email abuse. Again Scarffbag, I
>don't want any of your emails in my mailbox.
No use; I've complained several times. They don't listen. He
doesn't listen. Lucky for me, I have the technology to just
never see his garbage...pity those who don't. Barf is incapable
of seeing the difference between email and Usenet. Typical ego
maniac; he thinks his messages are *so* damn important that he's
in a constant pissing, leg-crossing frenzy to make certain the
adults see them and give him the attention from the adults that
he so craves.
I can't recall the last person who so eminently deserved to be
utterly ingored. He's an attention-starved idiot of a higher order
than Wyatt; I'm outta here.
blues...@xenu.arscc.org
On Sun, 29 Mar 1998 22:04:45 -0800, Garry Scarff <sca...@mindspring.com>
wrote:
>Martin Hunt wrote:
>>
>> In article <351E2C...@mindspring.com>,
>> Garry Scarff <sca...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>> >And there goes Martin Hunt, swimming around the issue again.....
>>
>> Barfbag, why don't you keep your projectile vomitus to yourself?
>
>Because it enturbulates you, potty waste, and I can't think of scum
>(other than Tilman) that yourself.
<<<sigh>>> I knew it was too good to last. Time to banish him to the
killfile again. <<<PLONK!!!>>>
Blue Streak
Current inhabitants of my kill file:
wg...@loop.com, wonde...@aol.com, rons...@aol.com,
kew...@teleport.com,koos.t...@trenite.de, be...@arcadis.be,
sc...@iag.net, h...@netcom.com, ErinAn...@rocketmail.com,
mikes...@aol.com, sass...@aol.com, jus...@directnet.com,
Sim...@webtv.net, fire...@email.msn.com, sno...@worldonline.nl,
Ian Shillington <ian...@gte.net>, Geistes...@webtv.net
wgert
Expected of Armstrong is that he serves his time in jail as per the
arrest warrant which is out on him.
wgert
Garry Scarff <sca...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>wgert wrote:
>>
>> Speaking of things that are not allowed, are you still hanging out in
>> Canada to avoid your arrest warrant?
>>
Pimoty
Wgert: Expected of Armstrong is that he serves his time in jail as per the
arrest warrant which is out on him.>>
How do you feel about Hubbard no serving his 4 years in a french jail for fraud
? Or how do you feel about Heber Jentsch being out on 1 million bail from
Spain, under investigation of a variety of crimes ?
Compared to this Armstrong's civil disobedience does not look like much, now
does it ? Yet you still want him locked up ? Afraid of the truth I guess ?
© Anti-Cult ®
On Tue, 31 Mar 1998 04:24:53 GMT.
wg...@loop.com (wgert).
From: All USENET -- http://www.Supernews.com.
Wrote on the subject: Re: Wgert on Armstrong:
>Expected of Armstrong is that he serves his time in jail as per the
>arrest warrant which is out on him.
>
>wgert
>
Expected out of your church president is that he returns to Spain, where
they really want him for the trial. He fled after a bail of 1.1 million
dollars.
Steve A
On Sat, 28 Mar 1998 17:41:34 GMT, ref...@bway.net (Diane Richardson)
wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Mar 1998 11:30:10 -0500, rne...@thecia.net (Ron Newman)
> wrote:
>
> >In article <01bd5a5d$0fb63660$8164...@cecilia.carasoft>, "Christer
> >Lindstrom" <cl...@carasoft.se> wrote:
> >
> >> > I'm a critic and *I* think some (not all) of the German actions are
> >> > unfair and discriminatory.
> >>
> >> Examples please.
> >
> >The "are you now or have you ever been" questions for potential
> >employees. The plans for covert surveillance. These things leave
> >a bad taste in the mouth of this left-winger...
>
> I stopped thinking of myself as a left-winger years ago, but I feel
> strongly that some of the actions taken by various government agencies
> in Germany (and in some German states) are heavy-handed and
> counterproductive.
I think that it is important to recognise that the European legal
system operates on a totally different basis to that in the US. The US
constitution is, in European timescales, considerably younger than our
legal system (most English common law, for example, dates back
centuries beyond the establishment of the US constitution), and
European expectations of "rights" are considerably different from
American ones.
Of course, in practice, the American system probably results in people
ending up with _less_ rights, since the apparent power of the legal
system to abrogate their rights in favour of well-moneyed litigants
mitigates heavily against the common citizen - just look at the Henson
and Ward cases for examples of this. On the other side, in practical
terms, European countries today tend to exercise considerably more
tolerance towards most fringe groups in society than the US - the
American attitude towards gay people, for example, seems to be about
30 years behind that of, say, Germany or Holland, and you won't see a
disabled man thrown into prison for cannabis possession just so the
police can get their hands on his property in Europe, either.
Furthermore, Germany and Germans (not to mention every European
country that was occupied by Nazi Germany during the war) have ample
justification for their caution over groups that appear to be trying
to subvert the rule of law: remember that Hitler's rise to power was
something that occurred quietly and by stages. Even today, Germans of
my acquaintance who are old enough to at least remember the latter
part of the war and its aftermath have personally expressed their
disquiet at the way in which the National Socialist party managed to
take control and begin the disposal of those they considered
undesirable before anyone started to wake up and smell the burning
synagogues. I think that it is natural that Germany, for example,
should take the antics of Scientology in that country very seriously,
even if it means abrogating the rights of a few to practice their
so-called "religion" in order to ensure that nothing like the
Holocaust/Third Reich ever happens again.
They may be overreacting, but I can understand why, and sympathise.
Practicing medicine without a licence? You decide.
"Step Four - Cures for Illness
You will now find BTs and clusters being cures for illnesses of the body
part. Handle all such BTs and clusters by blowing them off. "Cures for
Illness" will then cease to read. [NOTS 34, Fair Use excerpt]
--
Steve A, SP4, GGBC, KBM, Unsalvageable PTS/SP #12
"...Your suppositions include an unwarranted accusation which
I do not consider myself called upon to address..."
- a nice line in diplomatic put-down from Swedish
A/G in response to letter of Warren McShane
Tilman Hausherr
In <35222083...@news.demon.co.uk>, ste...@castlsys.demon.co.uk
(Steve A) wrote:
>disabled man thrown into prison for cannabis possession just so the
>police can get their hands on his property in Europe, either.
More on this topic here:
http://www2.gol.com/users/joewein/wod.htm
I'd like to remind everyone that "Reverend" Robin Scott is still in
jail, in maximum security. If you are a regular here and want to write
or call his family, e-mail me. (Steve - search dejanews to see the
update on his status)
Tilman
wgert
Crap!
But Armstrong is right there in Canada, a car trip away from
California.
The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com (© Anti-Cult ®) wrote:
Diane Richardson
My newsreader didn't get SteveA's reply to my post, but I found
it in Dejanews and reply here.
I wrote:
> I stopped thinking of myself as a left-winger years ago, but I feel
> strongly that some of the actions taken by various government agencies
> in Germany (and in some German states) are heavy-handed and
> counterproductive.
SteveA replied:
I think that it is important to recognise that the European legal
system operates on a totally different basis to that in the US. The US
constitution is, in European timescales, considerably younger than our
legal system (most English common law, for example, dates back
centuries beyond the establishment of the US constitution), and
European expectations of "rights" are considerably different from
American ones.
_____________________________________
They're *quite* different when it comes to government recognition of
what constitutes an established religion, of course. That, too, comes
from the ancient roots of western European law.
Reaction against that tradition is what has made the United States
attitude towards religious freedom so different from that of the Old
World. I'm grateful to live in a society that offers greater freedom
of conscience.
_______________________________________
Of course, in practice, the American system probably results in people
ending up with _less_ rights, since the apparent power of the legal
system to abrogate their rights in favour of well-moneyed litigants
mitigates heavily against the common citizen - just look at the Henson
and Ward cases for examples of this.
_______________________________________
Should we ignore the McDonald's case in the U.K.? I'm not sure this
problem occurs *only* in the U.S.
_______________________________________
On the other side, in practical
terms, European countries today tend to exercise considerably more
tolerance towards most fringe groups in society than the US - the
American attitude towards gay people, for example, seems to be about
30 years behind that of, say, Germany or Holland, and you won't see a
disabled man thrown into prison for cannabis possession just so the
police can get their hands on his property in Europe, either.
________________________________________
Sorry, but comparing the "U.S." attitude towards gays and/or the
disabled is like comparing apples and oranges. The U.K., for example,
is about the size of one U.S. state -- and I imagine the population in
most of the U.K. is much more homogeneous than in the U.S.
For example, I doubt if there's any city in the world more tolerant of
gays than San Francisco, and last time I looked that was part of the
U.S. In my own town, the Halloween parade through Greenwich Village
is a festivity organized and run by gays enjoyed by the entire
community. Did you know the Empire State Building is lit up in
lavender for Gay Pride Day? Does that happen in London?
________________________________________
Furthermore, Germany and Germans (not to mention every European
country that was occupied by Nazi Germany during the war) have ample
justification for their caution over groups that appear to be trying
to subvert the rule of law: remember that Hitler's rise to power was
something that occurred quietly and by stages.
_____________________________________________
I dunno -- maybe we read different history books or something. Seems
to me Hitler's Nazis gained control at the national elections held on
31 July 1932, when 14 million Germans, 37.4 percent of all voters,
cast their votes for the Nazis. That's when the Nazi Party became the
largest political party in Germany, with 230 seats in the Reichstag.
That was an open election, not an insidious putsch.
_____________________________________________
Even today, Germans of
my acquaintance who are old enough to at least remember the latter
part of the war and its aftermath have personally expressed their
disquiet at the way in which the National Socialist party managed to
take control and begin the disposal of those they considered
undesirable before anyone started to wake up and smell the burning
synagogues.
______________________________________________
Those acquaintances of yours certainly must have been asleep for years
if they missed the Nazi-led nationwide boycott of Jewish businesses on
April 1, 1933, the Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil
Service (excluding all Jews from government jobs) passed just a couple
of days after the boycott, local laws too numerous to mention banning
Jews from the use of public facilities passed in 1933 and thereafter,
the German court decision barring Jews from serving as administrators
of estates in October 1933, and the infamous Nuremberg Laws of
September 1935, which stripped German Jews of German citizenship and
forbade not only marriages but even sexual relations between Jews and
non-Jewish Germans.
That's an awful lot to sleep through while waiting to smell the scent
of burning synagogues.
__________________________________________________
I think that it is natural that Germany, for example,
should take the antics of Scientology in that country very seriously,
even if it means abrogating the rights of a few to practice their
so-called "religion" in order to ensure that nothing like the
Holocaust/Third Reich ever happens again.
They may be overreacting, but I can understand why, and sympathise.
___________________________________________________
I believe that calmer heads in the German government wille eventually
prevail.
Diane Richardson
ref...@bway.net
© Anti-Cult ®
On Fri, 03 Apr 1998 01:03:25 GMT.
wg...@loop.com (wgert).
From: All USENET -- http://www.Supernews.com.
Wrote on the subject: Re: Wgert on Armstrong:
>Crap!
>But Armstrong is right there in Canada, a car trip away from
>California.
>
>The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com (© Anti-Cult ®) wrote:
>>On Tue, 31 Mar 1998 04:24:53 GMT.
>>wg...@loop.com (wgert).
>>From: All USENET -- http://www.Supernews.com.
>>Wrote on the subject: Re: Wgert on Armstrong:
>
>>>Expected of Armstrong is that he serves his time in jail as per the
>>>arrest warrant which is out on him.
>>>
>>>wgert
>
Again Wgert:
Expected out of your church president is that he returns to Spain, where
they really want him for the trial. He fled after a bail of 1.1 million
dollars.
What's crap about that? Is it crap that it was a wog court that
sentenced your cults president? You're a moron wgert, and your getter
dumber and dumber for each message you write here.
Your criminal cult is on the run wgert. Keep on running stupid....
Unknown
wg...@loop.com (wgert) wrote:
>>>Expected of Armstrong is that he serves his time in jail as per the
>>>arrest warrant which is out on him.
>>>
Gerry's done his time in jail - the Penitentiary of $cientology. You
know, the one you're currently in.
But maybe you'll earn enough points posting your usual degenerate crap
to bust out. Back to step 1 on the board - "Go -->".
A new life awaits you, Wgruntie. But do you have much of a one left ?
Whatever, regards to the pig.
Who's currently playing 'tops' by the way ?
>>>wgert, the DA expert.
Yeah, right !
How're the feet by the way ?
ExScioKid
Andreas Heldal-Lund
Why are you so scared "wgert"??? Are you not a Scientologist?
Are you not able? Can't you handle me? Do my questions scare
you? Why do you hide? Why run?
I defenitely do not want to become even remotely similar to
you, that's why I say "Thanks, but no thanks!" to Scientology.
The day I become afraid of others or scared to join a open
debate with my honest opinions, that day life has no meaning.
Looking at you Scientology obviousely is harmfull, I will
have to keep on warning others.
Have a nice weekend!
On Fri, 03 Apr 1998 01:03:25 GMT, wg...@loop.com (wgert) wrote:
>Crap!
>But Armstrong is right there in Canada, a car trip away from
>California.
>
>The.Galacti...@ThePentagon.com (© Anti-Cult ®) wrote:
>>On Tue, 31 Mar 1998 04:24:53 GMT.
>>wg...@loop.com (wgert).
>>From: All USENET -- http://www.Supernews.com.
>>Wrote on the subject: Re: Wgert on Armstrong:
>
>>>Expected of Armstrong is that he serves his time in jail as per the
>>>arrest warrant which is out on him.
>>>
>>>wgert
>
>
>
>
Regards, Andreas Adm. TOXE CXI
www.xenu.net
---
"If anyone can show me, and prove to me, that I am wrong in
thought or deed, I will gladly change. I seek the truth, which
never yet hurt anybody. It is only persistence in self-delusion
and ignorance which does harm." -- Marcus Aurelius
Steve A
On Fri, 03 Apr 1998 00:36:49 GMT, ref...@bway.net (Diane Richardson)
wrote:
>
>
>
> My newsreader didn't get SteveA's reply to my post, but I found
> it in Dejanews and reply here.
>
> I wrote:
> > I stopped thinking of myself as a left-winger years ago, but I feel
> > strongly that some of the actions taken by various government agencies
> > in Germany (and in some German states) are heavy-handed and
> > counterproductive.
>
> SteveA replied:
> I think that it is important to recognise that the European legal
> system op
> European expectations of "rights" are considerably different from
> American ones.
> _____________________________________
>
> They're *quite* different when it comes to government recognition of
> what constitutes an established religion, of course. That, too, comes
> from the ancient roots of western European law.
>
> Reaction against that tradition is what has made the United States
> attitude towards religious freedom so different from that of the Old
> World. I'm grateful to live in a society that offers greater freedom
> of conscience.
But does it? I agree that that was the basis of the Constitution, but
I don't see it working particularly well in practice. The UK legal
system is pretty inaccessible if you don't have much money, but it
doesn't mitigate against the ordinary citizen to the extent that the
US one does.
In general, throughout Europe, I would say that religious freedom is
no less, and given the way the US system operates in practice is
probably greater, than that available in the US.
> _______________________________________
>
> Of course, in practice, the American system probably results in people
> ending up with _less_ rights, since the apparent power of the legal
> system to abrogate their rights in favour of well-moneyed litigants
> mitigates heavily against the common citizen - just look at the Henson
> and Ward cases for examples of this.
> _______________________________________
>
> Should we ignore the McDonald's case in the U.K.? I'm not sure this
> problem occurs *only* in the U.S.
It doesn't. But such cases are comparatively rare here: they seem to
be a daily occurrence in the US.
> On the other side, in practical
> terms, European countries today tend to exercise considerably more
> tolerance towards most fringe groups in society than the US - the
> American attitude towards gay people, for example, seems to be about
> 30 years behind that of, say, Germany or Holland, and you won't see a
> disabled man thrown into prison for cannabis possession just so the
> police can get their hands on his property in Europe, either.
> ________________________________________
>
> Sorry, but comparing the "U.S." attitude towards gays and/or the
> disabled is like comparing apples and oranges. The U.K., for example,
> is about the size of one U.S. state -- and I imagine the population in
> most of the U.K. is much more homogeneous than in the U.S.
First of all, I was talking about Europe as a whole, hence my
references to Germany and Holland.
Secondly, the population of the UK is around 60 million - a fifth of
the entire population of the US, admittedly all compressed into a
space the size of a small US state.
Thirdly, the population of the UK is most certainly *not* homogeneous.
Sure, there's a lot of racial and cultural groups crammed in cheek by
jowl, but they are no more homogeneous than any built-up US city.
I think that comparing the US attitude towards minorities of any
stripe with that of the UK and/or Europe (which is certainly *not*
homogeneous - we don't even all speak a common language) is perfectly
valid, given that we are also comparing the attitudes towards
religious freedom, which is subject to *precisely* the same
sociological factors as attitudes towards gays and disabled people, ie
population density, historical cultural attitudes, legal systems, etc.
> For example, I doubt if there's any city in the world more tolerant of
> gays than San Francisco, and last time I looked that was part of the
> U.S. In my own town, the Halloween parade through Greenwich Village
> is a festivity organized and run by gays enjoyed by the entire
> community. Did you know the Empire State Building is lit up in
> lavender for Gay Pride Day? Does that happen in London?
I think that San Francisco is exceptional. We do have gay pride
marches in London, but I don't believe that buildings get lit up or
anything like that.
> ________________________________________
>
> Furthermore, Germany and Germans (not to mention every European
> country that was occupied by Nazi Germany during the war) have ample
> justification for their caution over groups that appear to be trying
> to subvert the rule of law: remember that Hitler's rise to power was
> something that occurred quietly and by stages.
> _____________________________________________
>
> I dunno -- maybe we read different history books or something. Seems
> to me Hitler's Nazis gained control at the national elections held on
> 31 July 1932, when 14 million Germans, 37.4 percent of all voters,
> cast their votes for the Nazis. That's when the Nazi Party became the
> largest political party in Germany, with 230 seats in the Reichstag.
> That was an open election, not an insidious putsch.
They weren't electing the Nazis on a platform of burning Jews. They
voted for a party that claimed to be able to pull them out of 20 years
of economic disaster, and save them from the rapidly growing Communist
tendency.
Following their election, the National Socialists then embarked on
various legal manoeuvrings (where have we heard that before) which
ultimately resulted in their having effective control of the *entire*
Government, not just 37.4% of it. I have to admit that the details are
now a little hazy in my memory, but that's the essence of it.
Me:
> Even today, Germans of
> my acquaintance who are old enough to at least remember the latter
> part of the war and its aftermath have personally expressed their
> disquiet at the way in which the National Socialist party managed to
> take control and begin the disposal of those they considered
> undesirable before anyone started to wake up and smell the burning
> synagogues.
> ______________________________________________
>
> Those acquaintances of yours certainly must have been asleep for years
> if they missed the Nazi-led nationwide boycott of Jewish businesses on
> April 1, 1933, the Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil
> Service (excluding all Jews from government jobs) passed just a couple
> of days after the boycott, local laws too numerous to mention banning
> Jews from the use of public facilities passed in 1933 and thereafter,
> the German court decision barring Jews from serving as administrators
> of estates in October 1933, and the infamous Nuremberg Laws of
> September 1935, which stripped German Jews of German citizenship and
> forbade not only marriages but even sexual relations between Jews and
> non-Jewish Germans.
Well, to be fair, most of those acquaintances were not born by this
time, so I am relying on 2nd-hand information as far as the actual
events were concerned. However, the revelations of the scale of the
Holocaust (remember, death camps were invariably located OUTSIDE
German national borders - the camps within Germany were "merely"
concentration camps) did come as a surprise to many Germans.
Remember, too, that we can look at this slew of legislation with the
benefit of hindsight, and without the accompanying propaganda and
economic hardship. The fact is that Germany was on the verge of
economic collapse in the '20's, and the efforts of the newly-elected
National Socialists to improve things will have blinded many to the
realities of the party's aims. Then take a look at that list of
legislation you provide: initially, we have laws to ban Jews from the
Civil Service - to a nation already being told how the Jews were
responsible for the mess they were in, that probably seemed like a
highly reasonable step. Then they went a little further, accompanied
by further propaganda, sufficiently successfully that two years later
the thought of marrying or having sexual relations with a Jew was
probably unthinkable to the vast majority of those subject to that
propaganda anyway.
So the Germans went along with a gradually escalating campaign of
discrimination against Jews? Is that any different from the way
Americans went along with McCarthyism? At least Americans could have
been certain that they wouldn't have ended up in prison for objecting
to it, but McCarthy was able to continue his witchhunt for a good long
while, wasn't he?
Diane:
> That's an awful lot to sleep through while waiting to smell the scent
> of burning synagogues.
How long did it take before American public opposition to what was
going on in Viet Nam got something done about it? Did Americans "sleep
through" the defoliation campaigns and the carpet bombing of villages.
History shows us that the citizens of every nation have "slept
through" some of the most appalling atrocities committed in their
name. Why must Germany have been any different?
Me:
> I think that it is natural that Germany, for example,
> should take the antics of Scientology in that country very seriously,
> even if it means abrogating the rights of a few to practice their
> so-called "religion" in order to ensure that nothing like the
> Holocaust/Third Reich ever happens again.
>
> They may be overreacting, but I can understand why, and sympathise.
> ___________________________________________________
>
> I believe that calmer heads in the German government wille eventually
> prevail.
Fine. I believe that Germany's stand on Scientology is unwise only to
the extent that it does
unfettered.
For my money, the right of the people to express their opinion without
fear of harassment or, worse, legally-induced bankruptcy trumps
several times over the right of Scientologists to practice their
so-called religion.