From heldal@online.no Wed Dec 16 11:52:46 1998
This is my second e-mail respons to an OT VII. The first e-mail basically
just told me I was a fool and included two quotes from Hubbard.
Any comments or impressions you want to share with me after you've read
this? Appreciate anything I get. :)
[START MY E-MAIL RESPONS:]
At 07:46 16.12.98 -0800, you wrote:
You've grossly misunderstood me and Operation Clambake. And as I suspected
you've not investigated even close to enough to make any of the assumptions
you have made about both.
I don't state anywhere that I'm objective. On the contrary, I'm human and
I have my opinions. I set out to investigate Scientology, Dianetics, CoS
and Hubbard, and came back with some opinions. I made a private web page
(which evolved to a whole site) which can only reflect my opinions. That's
not unbiased or objective, and it never claimed it was! Why should I strive
to be objective? In the eyes of most Scientologists that means only
repeating what's already well documented and said on official CoS sites.
Why should I use my time and effort to duplicate anything I do not agree
with? Please tell me where the logic is buried here. Being of a different
opinion than you, does _NOT_ mean I did a less honest search for truth. It
doesn't even have to mean I know less than you. You reveal your ignorance
by arguing like that has to be the fact, while you not even bothered to
investigate enough to even make a slightly logical argument. Sorry pal,
very poor job!
I spell it out pretty clear, even a fool like me is able enough to
understand it, that these are my opinions and here are all the documentation
which I base my current opinions on. Welcome visitor, you read and make up
your own mind! But I go even further; I urge visitors to my site to also
visit sites of people and organizations that represent views and opinions
opposite to mine. I link to www.scientology.org (the official Scientology
site), the freezoners and for example Russ Shaws bigot page. I tell visitors
not to take my word for anything, but check out even those who claim I'm a
bigot, a fool, mad and a criminal.
Would you claim the official web pages of CoS are more objective than mine?
I trust my fellow man, I don't want to trick anybody into agreeing with me
by limiting their right to investigate only to my version. I don't want
others to base their opinion on only censored or biased information. This is
how cults operate and contradicts everything I stand for. I'm not afraid of
neither lies or the truth. CoS might come after me and spread lies to try
to silence me, we have proof they have done this many times before, but I
trust truth about me will win. I can only live my life as best I can, I
have no chance against the black pr machinery of CoS, their millions of
dollars or their unmoral methods. But enough critics like me will finally
bring any monster to their knees. Along the way many may very well be
crushed, but all will be crushed if nobody dare.
Your're the fool here, if any of us are, since you seem to be totally
unwilling to acknowledge or respect that people like me disagree with you.
I see no links from _ANY_ pro-Scientology sites to a critical page asking
the reader to make up their own mind. Nowhere! The paradox is that CoS
only have links to approved pro sites and even tell their members to install
software on their computer which will blindly _censor_ all critical texts
(and a lot more) when they connect to the 'Net.
For over 2 years I've even, on top of all the rest, invited all
Scientologists in the world to point out where there are errors on my pages.
If they can prove I'm wrong, then I'll change it. If they only have a
different opinion I offer to host their opinions wherever they want on my
pages so that visitors to Operation Clambake easily can access their
comments too. I've also added a separate page where Scientologists can send
me their texts to explain their general view, the subject is up to them.
There is also a open guest book where Scientologists can post, have never
censored a Scientologist from there. Have you read these page and noticed
how many Scientologists who dared to take my challenge? If all my attempts
to offer the opposite view isn't enough for you, then what, for crying out
loud, would be?
It is a fact worthy of serious thought that no Scientologist so far have
been able to do this. And there is no excuse for them, since I of course
use their silence as my best argument when asked for the validity of my
claims or defend against stupid claims that I am the bigot etc. I know
exactly what you will say to this, please, at least try to surprise me with
some real communication skills and reason.
And please think before you mail any more poorly thought claims about me
hating you because you are a Scientologist or have anything against
Scientology on bigoted grounds. It's just stupid and lacks any valid
argument. Try instead to figure out why I do go after CoS, and not the
Freezoners for example. Try to understand what really is going on, and allow
yourself to at least be open for the possibility that even SPs like me can
be rather nice people without any wish to harm you personally. Maybe I have
no secret agenda, and even no hidden "blood sex crimes". Maybe I
just see something that scares me in an organization that you view
differently. Maybe one of us is wrong, maybe both of us have some things
right. I'm not going to bite and I'm not going to willfully misunderstand
your arguments. I might misunderstand, but I'll allow you to correct me.
That's what a discussion is about.
>What you say about anyone who might actually embrace a
I tell you my opinion. We disagree because we have different values and
priorities in life, and different experiences. There are many things I
know much better than you, and vice versa. And may I remind you that I
didn't chase you with my opinions, but you came to me and initiated this
e-mail exchange by calling me a fool.
You are the one judging me, without even the decency to give good arguments
or documentation. You call me a fool and serve only a couple of quotes from
Hubbard. I can only assume what you claim I have wrong, or what is so wrong
in having a different opinion than you have.
The first impression of you and your case was very poor, but I'll happily
give you several chances to fix that.
>You are obviously a very bitter creature with nothing
I don't agree very much with Margaret Thatcher, but I'll give you a quote
from her since you shared yours with me:
Where is the logical connection between disagreeing with you and having to
be bitter. Try to focus on the issue here, I'm not falling for your attempts
to make me the cause of the idiocy and madness of L Ron Hubbard or your
own religion. On my pages you find the documentations and arguments for my
opinions and claims, try to address that if you dare.
>time than to attack an organization that has helped so
You know very little about what I do with my life, for all you know I could
be very effective and manage more than you and still handle my sites on the
'net. Don't make stupid assumptions about things you know close to nothing
about. It only ruins your own case and makes you look like a fool. If
I believe CoS is a threat against what I treasure in this society, then it
should be pretty obvious why I do what I do. I have the ability to understand
why you would be of your opinions, why is this so hard for you? If you need
an cruel and evil enemy to justify your strange belief system, then you've
come to the wrong place.
Did you honestly believe that I would change any opinions just because you
sent me an e-mail claiming I am a fool? Are you such a lousy judge of
character, that you thought this tactic would help your case with me? If
not, why did you send such a mail to me then? Do you have the habit of
doing things that has no sense or meaning?
>direct all that hate toward something that actually is
Same goes here; what has hate to do with being of the opinion that CoS is
a dangerous organization and that Hubbard was mad? Do you hate all
Christians since you disagree with them and believe the image of Jesus is an
implanted image only? I'm not Christian, and I take my right to say my
opinion about Christianity, still I hate no Christians. Actually some of my
dearest friends are Christians. I'm an outspoken Atheist, but my goal isn't
to make everybody Atheists, not even one! I know there will always be
Scientologists, Christians and believers (and disbelievers) in all sorts of
things. I dread the society, in fact, where everybody do and think the same.
In my opinion hate is destructive, I strive to be constructive. I have no
hate for you, or any other Scientologist. I have no hate for CoS or David
Miscavige. I don't hate KKK either, even though I'm as far from them in
opinion as it is possible to be. Hating them does not do any good. Trying
to challenge their minds and respecting them as fellow humans is what brings
peace in the long run. It doesn't start anywhere else than with me. But
respecting and tolerating others does not mean agreeing or not speak up
when one disagree! Daring to stand up and expressing critical opinions and
views is what makes human thought evolve and is the core of what I consider
my moral and ethical guidelines: The Human Rights as defined by UN.
>like the big drug companies or the one world governments
What will you accomplish by hating them? Nothing, still hating and alienating
everything and everybody they don't like is an important part of Scientology.
Says a lot about L Ron Hubbard, CoS, and people who defend them no matter
what. While the support of Hubbard and CoS seems to be blind and unconditional
among all Scientologists I've met, neither myself or any critics I've met
have the same blind opinion about any other critic. Many critics have no
problems with openly debating their disagreements, still we are friends and
allow ourself to say we do agree on many issues in life.
>reason I can just as easily say you are the one duped by
And you have the right to say so if that is your opinion! I welcome yours,
and CoSs, opinion on me and all my claims. Difference between us is that
I have documented mine, you're just a lot of hot air so far.
>quo lies that have kept mankind living a mediocre hell all
Coward. You're just chickening out because you don't have anything that
would hold water. It's your defence system acting, ignore the arguments and
claims from the opposition by throwing suspicion on the person making them.
That way you do not have to challenge your own. Only one with very weak
arguments and proof do this. Hubbard wrote policies on how Scientologists
should perfect it. If you were right and I were wrong, you (especially as a
Scientologist) would have no problem ripping apart any argument or
documentation I presented. What scares you? You don't have to answer me,
just try to be honest to yourself for a couple of seconds.
What do I have to defend? Nothing. If anything in Scientology proves right
I'll have no problem admitting it. If the documentation claiming Hubbard was
a bigamist or used drugs and alcohol proves false, then I'll stop claiming
it was so. But what do you have to loose? I suspect you have a long time
investment, you've invested your personality and maybe most of your grownup
life in Scientology. Maybe most of your friends are Scientologists and you
know you will loose them if you blow. Maybe you don't have much money, no
social security plan or simple things like a car and your own apartment
(these are just examples, I'm not saying it has to fit you).
What would it take for you to admit you have been a victim of a hoax? Would
it be possible for you at all, or would a lot of pride and shame easily
come in the way for such an admittance? Wouldn't it just be easier for you
to keep going along? I suspect this is one of the reasons why many have
problems getting out, even though they probably know deep down something
is very wrong. Cults are specialized on this, this is what makes them cults.
It is not true that only fools fall for cults, anybody is a potential
victim of mind control, fraud and deceit.
Is it in the cards that, for example you, would know if you were had? No.
Have others in other religions and movements based their belief on just as
strong and convincing personal experiences (proof) as you base yours? Yes,
this is very common. Still, all of them can't be true. This only shows that
we are relatively easily fooled, or directed into accepting things that
don't have to be true.
Life in CoS gives you a lot, if not you wouldn't have been there. Still,
do you ever wonder what might make you leave, or change your mind? If OT
III didn't, or all the critical stuff on the 'Net - what then? If Hubbard
_really_ was mad, would you ever find out if you only trust what CoS says?
>Oh, and by the way, I am an OT VII / Class V auditor with
Good! When you dare to seriously evaluate Operation Clambake and all the
documentation there, we both know where the other stand and we can continue
without getting stuck in misunderstandings.
But I have my doubt that you will continue. All the ones before you have
stopped after two (or so) e-mail exchanges, chickening out claiming I was
hopeless. Most started off like you by sending me no-good notes just to
tell me I'm a fool, Clambake is full of errors or I've have misunderstood.
When I asked them for explanations or documentation, they couldn't. And the
replies that came seldom dared to quote my questions, they just repeated
their attacks with new words and quotes by Hubbard.
This is what Scientologists call communication skills??? It should be no
difficult challenge for a OT VIII / Class V auditor like yourself, to
handle me. I must be a dream come true; someone really critical who you
can demonstrate your communication skills and OT Powers on. Think of the
Big Win if I told my CoS critic friends that I'd changed my opinion.
But since you have no OT Powers, because there are no such thing, and
because the "communication skills" learned in CoS is worth zilch
outside CoS environment - you have to find a way out of the tight spot by
inventing something to blame on me. Listen to Lron and accept that I am
among the hopeless SPs that has a secret agenda (sponsored by drug cartels
or psychiatry organizations), or just call me a fool. Why should you take
a criminal or a fool seriously? This way Lron got his followers to not
evaluate the information and arguments that would make his house of cards
crumble. Your ticket out of it is to distract yourself. So sad that we know
all the tricks already. The only secrets you have now is all the new
policies David Miscavige has made which has still not leaked out. I have a
problem understanding why you would willingly trust your religion and
your so-called church in this mans hands.
I have good reasons to take the same defence position, since I know there
is no way I could change a long time Scientologist like you. But this is
where you find the difference between you and me. My goal is not to change
you, or convince you to leave CoS. My interest in talking to you is the
same which made me investigate this subject in the first place. I would
like to understand. I trust you if you say you believe in Scientology, I
even trust you if you claim you have seen proof of it working. Like I
believe others from other religions or convictions. I also assume, before
finding proof of anything else, that you are a nice person with just as
noble intentions as I have. I just happen to be of a different opinions on
some basic issues. I still would like to understand you better, or at least
offer you the chance to defend your case. I've never been afraid to challenge
my opinions. I might be wrong, and challenging them is the only way I can
find out.
PS: This reply is also posted to the newsgroup alt.religion.scientology
since it could have some interest for others. I did of course remove your
name and e-mail address first. Probably hard to accept, but even
Scientologists can trust me.
Best wishes, SP4 & Adm. TOXE CXI
[END MY E-MAIL]
Further facts
about this criminal empire may be found at
Operation Clambake and FACTNet.
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: My e-mail reply to an OT VII / Class V auditor
From: heldal@online.no (Andreas Heldal-Lund - www.xenu.net)
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 19:52:46 GMT
>I have read enough of you vendetta web site to know there
>is more than just an objective view point going on, it's
>personal with you.
>better way is an insult. How dare you infer what I might
>know as a hoax and that you somehow know better.
>better to do with your
"I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding
because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have
not a single political argument left."
>many. Why don't you
>harmful to mankind,
>types. For this
>a hoax, the status
>these millenniums. I could go on but you are obviously
>beyond help in your twisted cause.
>half the OEC course under my belt. I'm not telling you this
>to brag either. The kind of spiritualism and insight I have
>gained someone as solid as you probably couldn't even
>understand. Like I said, have a nice eternity.
Andreas Heldal-Lund, Normannsgaten 9, N-4013 Stavanger, Norway
Pho: +47 88 00 66 66 Fax: 90 32 35 46 E-mail: heldal@online.no
home.sol.no/~spirous www.xenu.net www.hedning.no/hedning
---------------------------------------------------------------
"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
---------------------------------------------------------------
The views and opinions stated within this web page are those of the
author or authors which wrote them and may not reflect the views and
opinions of the ISP or account user which hosts the web page. The
opinions may or may not be those of the Chairman of The Skeptic Tank.
This web page (and The Skeptic Tank) is in no way connected with
nor part of the Scientology crime syndicate. To review the crime syndicate's
absurdly idiotic web pages, check out www.scientology.org or any one of the
many secret front groups the cult attempts to hide behind.
Return to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.