Ian Rennie <ir102@york.ac.uk>

20 Mar 2000

>On Mon, 20 Mar 2000 publicrelations@scientology.org wrote:

<snip>

Fredric Rice's most recent postings reflect an imagined viciousness that I have been instructed to comment on so I can create an impression of him as a bad person. I have attempted to create the impression that his posts are a reflection of his mindset as an anti-religionist, atheist, hater of religions in general, and a member of the "skeptics" movement. One of these is true. His recent postings have given me the opportunity to bring out these boilerplate paragraphs where I will attempt to convince you he eats babies for lunch.

Fredric Rice was never active in Scientology in any capacity. Although this is proof of sanity, I shall attempt to make this look like a bad thing. He has not had any contact with Scientology Churches and never ever took part in any of the Church's activities. Clever guy, you may be thinking. However I am trying to make this look like this means he has no knowledge of the Church of Scientology, its teachings and catechism. It doesn't, of course, but I'm too much of a dumbass to realise this. I also want you to believe that he has overstepped the constitutional boundries of free expression by openly advocating violence against adherents of the religions he hates. If this were the case, however, he would have been arrested. If we could have got any case against him down to a parking violation we'd be having a grand ol' circle-jerk here at the Sandcastle about THAT one.

a) On July 29, 1999 he exhorted Bob Minton to exercise less restraint. Minton has twice been arrested for assaulting Scientologists and has shot at Scientologists in his neighborhood with a shotgun. However, at the point I am talking about he had only been arrested once. I am aslo lying to you in the above paragraph because he never shot AT scientologists, he instead shot into the air, as he had every legal right to do. Note if he had been arrested for the shotgun thing then it would be Revenge Of The Circle Jerk in the OSA offices. Rice wrote about Minton: "I would hope he kills the criminals rather than exhibit the restraint and understanding he has so far. I will reload for him any time." I'm not going to tell you the context of this message or where you can find it because that would reveal this to be a sane and rational statement. Aren't I clever?

b) Rice posted a call on the Internet (and please note there's no such thing as 'a call to the internet', it probably means a query to a.r.s) for private, personal information about a Los Angeles attorney, specifically asking for the name of his wife and that "if he has or had any daughters, I need to know what their names are." Again, I'm not going to tell you the context or where to find it because, you see, I'm chickenshit. I know none of this would stand up to a cherrystone from a five-year-old's fingers if I actually gave you context so I'm hiding behind this much like I hide behind not having given you my name. If I met you in public I'd probably shit my pants with fear.

Fredric Rice does not confine his anti-religious sentiments to Scientology. That's because he has no 'anti religious sentiments', much as I might want you to believe that he does. He's a skeptic and an atheist and there is nothing wrong with either of these except in my mind. However I'm now going to use the only weapon in my arsenal - aout of context quotes - to make you think there is. In his own words, "Christianity is founded upon resentment and fear, gullibility, wishful thinking, indoctrination and greed.". This is not, as you can see, hatred. People might not agree with it but it is as much opinion as the idea that, oh, for example, Jesus Christ was an implant stored in the human mind after we had been blown up in volcanoes by Xenu. He refers to Christianity as a "historically evil cult" and talks about Chritianity's "shoddy ethics" and "immoral nature." Again, this is a judgement call and not spreading hatred, but I want you to think the words he said are the equivalent to 'behead nuns now' or 'the problem with china is, there are too many chinks there'. Ow wait, forget that last one. He states that he "learned the history of the Christian cult in High School" and calls Christian doctrine "unworthy of respect, let alone worship." I am of the opinion that we should castrate and burn this man for expressing his opinion in this way. Die Rice, die! He continues by claiming that the Jewish Talmud and Toldoth, as well as the Islamic Koran "were no better.". As you may have noticed by now he is a follower of none of these religions. I'm trying to make the mental connection that because he is a follower of none of these religions and has said he disagrees with them, this makes him hate them. This wonderful example of Doublethink was brought to you by the Church of Scientology.

On his website he proclaims that he found that Nazism and Christianity were "virtually indistinguishable. They both have their prophet, Christ and Hitler. They both have their scapegoats -- homosexuals and the jews.... They both preach hatred of a minority" ... "Sieg Heil.". The only reason I have for including this last quote is to make you connect him with a nazi.

Rice cynically refers to himself an "ordained reverend,... ordained by the Universal Life Church" (ULC). Should this sound strange to anyone, here is more about the ULC (quoted from its web page): "The Universal Life Church has no traditional doctrine... Each individual has the privilege and the responsibility to determine what is right for them -- as long as it does not impinge upon the rights of others... We are active advocates and staunch defenders of the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America..." Wouldn't it behoove Rice at least to stick to the precepts of the church he claims ordained him? Now what I'm doing here, you see, is to cast doubt on two things simultaneously, firstly that he has been ordained, even though I have no proof to the contrary, and secondly that he is sticking to the precepts of the church, even though I haven's shown otherwise.

Skeptic? Naw, just another cynic. This last phrase was to prove that I have no understanding of what Skepticism is.

I did well on this one. I'm going back to my dorm where I'm going to think of Helena and have a Big Win all over my blankets.