Since some of the materials which describe the $cientology cult could be
considered to be copywritten materials, I have censored myself and The
Skeptic Tank by deleting any and all possible text files which describes
the cult's hidden mythologies. I have elected to quote just a bit of the
questionable text according to the "Fair Use" legal findings afforded to
those who report. - Fredric L. Rice, The Skeptic Tank, 09/Sep/95
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
From news.interserv.net!news.sprintlink.net!demon!castlsys.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail Wed Jul 19 09:29:02 1995
Path: news.interserv.net!news.sprintlink.net!demon!castlsys.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail
From: stevea@castlsys.demon.co.uk (Steve)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,misc.legal,misc.legal.computing,misc.taxes,comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: The Noose is Tightening on CoS (was Big Suprise - 79K) (LONG)
Followup-To: alt.religion.scientology,misc.legal,misc.legal.computing,misc.taxes,comp.org.eff.talk
Date: 15 Jul 1995 14:10:04 +0100
Organization: Castle Systems Ltd: systems designers to the gentry
Lines: 85
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <3u8enc$e34@castlsys.demon.co.uk>
References: <3u4mk8$n09@utopia.hacktic.nl> <noringDBpqJz.M72@netcom.com> <DBq3nJ.DwK@ceco.ceco.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: castlsys.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Xref: news.interserv.net alt.religion.scientology:75822 misc.legal:61829 misc.legal.computing:10224 misc.taxes:18774 comp.org.eff.talk:56797
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
R. Urban (a#urban@ccmail.ceco.com) wrote:
> noring@netcom.com (Jon Noring) wrote:
> (sniP)
> This is not intended to start a flame war, but you need to have more
> tolerance for beliefs that are different than your own, particularly
> those that are shared by minorities. (In case you are wondering, I was
> born and raised a Catholic.) And, if we don't protect the religious
> freedom of the minority, then the religious freedom of the majority will
> eventually be jeapordized.
Every so often, someone will delurk and blind us with the brilliance
of his insight, gleaned from, ooh, *minutes* of careful study of the
discussion on a.r.s.
My postings to a.r.s. are not designed to enlighten the clams: I know
that the mind control practiced by their cult is too good to make it
likely that my simple prose will cause them to "have a cognition".
No, I write for the benefit of newbies and lurkers, who might have
strayed into a.r.s. as a result of some of the adverse publicity the
cult has been receiving recently.
When I discover, as from reading this post, that my efforts, and
those of the others here who are interested in exposing the vicious
excesses of this evil cult for all to see, it makes me wonder whether
it's really worth bothering with.
Let's put it another way: CAN YOU NOT BLOODY UNDERSTAND PROPER
ENGLISH????
It is said, repeatedly and at length, by the vast majority of critics
that THEY ARE NOT ATTACKING THE "RELIGION". This battle is NOT about
religious freedom, irrespective of how the evil cult chooses to
characterise it: it is about a cult which uses all sorts of
smokescreens, including that of religious freedom, from behind which
they can launch amoral and vicious attacks on anyone who dare
question one jot of their practices, which include brainwashing,
child abuse, lying, bait and switch tactics, fraud, murder, abuse of
the legal system - the list is very long.
The space opera cosmology of the cult of Scientology is not something
that most of us take particular issue with - FreeZoners (ex-Scienos
who just practice the "tech") get an easy ride here. That having been
said, much of what Scientology practices as "scripture" is so
ludicrous as to be irresistible target practice for the rapier wits
of some of the critics here. Just as Christianity, Islam and
Buddhism - indeed, any public figure or entity - must be prepared to
accept criticism, so should Scientologists be prepared to accept that
there are others who find their beliefs comical. We are not talking
about persecution here, either, but criticism. That is reasonable:
persecution would not be.
Given your evident lack of understanding of the issues being aired
here, I don't suppose that you noticed the discussions on boycotting
of Scientologist-run businesses, where the consensus tended towards
NOT *persecuting* people running businesses who happen to be Scienos,
but simply advertising the Scn connection. Scientology "front groups"
are a completely different kettle of fish, though.
We are not here to persecute Scientology: we are here to expose the
unreasonable and irresponsible activities of an organisation whose
goal is to totally suppress any commentary or criticism on or of its
activities. I leave it to you to ponder on why they might be so keen
to hide their nature.
Steve
- --
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Support Dennis Erlich! Send cheques (any currency) labelled DENNIS ERLICH
DEFENCE FUND to: Carla Oakley/Katie Walsh, MORRISON & FOERSTER, 345
California St, San Francisco CA 94104-2675 Tel (415) 677-7700
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi, ronartistr - sent in your cheque yet?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6
iQBVAgUBMAe+KfsT8zz+lqiRAQE+7gH/Vx7bYWMkaaIex2yU5h/+d4WmTnTFpl3s
XC/71A4QysDbnAYDLn+Xi2hC0Z9yfSppwpb14iwAFiXyQx7rwYfoCA==
=vPyI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----