Since some of the materials which describe the $cientology cult could be considered to be

---
Master Index Current Directory Index Go to SkepticTank Go to Human Rights activist Keith Henson Go to Scientology cult

Skeptic Tank!

Since some of the materials which describe the $cientology cult could be considered to be copywritten materials, I have censored myself and The Skeptic Tank by deleting any and all possible text files which describes the cult's hidden mythologies. I have elected to quote just a bit of the questionable text according to the "Fair Use" legal findings afforded to those who report. - Fredric L. Rice, The Skeptic Tank, 09/Sep/95 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- From news.interserv.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!news.inlink.com!msn!scconsult.com!user Wed Jul 19 09:29:25 1995 Path: news.interserv.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.starnet.net!wupost!news.inlink.com!msn!scconsult.com!user From: bill@scconsult.com (Bill Stewart-Cole) Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology,misc.legal,misc.legal.computing,misc.taxes,comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: The Noose is Tightening on CoS (was Big Suprise - 79K) (LONG) Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 08:52:58 -0500 Organization: Stewart-Cole Consulting Lines: 79 Distribution: world Message-ID: References: <3u8enc$e34@castlsys.demon.co.uk> <19950718.001310.70@holsoft.demon.co.uk> <3uf5mk$3nj@ixnews7.ix.netcom.com> <3uhke9$gri@ixnews4.ix.netcom.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: sc1.scconsult.com X-Path-Mangled: Bill Gates doesn't need my posts. Let him get his own X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.0b27.5 Xref: news.interserv.net alt.religion.scientology:76955 misc.legal:62584 misc.legal.computing:10334 misc.taxes:19009 comp.org.eff.talk:57274 In article <3uhke9$gri@ixnews4.ix.netcom.com>, esi_inc@ix.netcom.com (Tim Johnson) wrote: >In visnet@onramp.net (Sri >Changiana Saar) writes: >> >>In article <3uf5mk$3nj@ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>, esi_inc@ix.netcom.com >(Tim >>Johnson) wrote: >> >>> Dear Sister Clara >> >>Pardon me for jumping in even though I'm not, technically, Sis Clara... > >So, as quick as someone might speak out and say, “Hey, I’m a >Scientologist and this is my point of view,” he would get vehemently and >viciously attacked religiously and personally from many sides; issue >taken with each paragraph - and all of the above based on... > >second and third hand information as I said; allegations, claims, >reports of apparently incriminating court records (much of such >inflammatory information is the result of Mr. Erlich’s activities, who >was thrown out of the Church for theft and Squirelling - that is, >altering the technology). What a shame that you do not confront any of it except in this blanket inaccuracy. I am amazed that you would term a quote from a CoS lawyer and the CoS's PR person to be second-hand. The court records are accurate as posted. Yes, I have looked up a number of the specific citations. Yes, they do describe criminal actions by high officials of the church. If you don't believe it, look it up yourself. Consider it 'case-clearing,' an extension of word-clearing. I suppose what you are saying is that if one was not present when Leisa Goodman was composing her web page, or when Cooley was babbling in court, or when various judges have written scathing decisions against the church, you cannot know any of this. By that standard I can as easily question your existence, because I have not touched you. As for Dennis, I doubt anyone much cares whether he ran away or was kicked out. Do you know from first-hand experience why he left? By your standard you do not unless you were IN the Sea Org at Clearwater when he was. Howver to accuse anyone of 'squirreling' is amusing. Hubbard altered the tech continuously for almost 40 years. Was he a squirrel? Can any change now be made to the tech by anyone? >Of course, someone will dutifully take exception to all these >statements, again. The rancor with which this occurs is my evidence. >So blast away. Rancor is unnecessary when simple rationality suffices. My attitude towards individual Scientologists is generally no more than pity. (I feel the same way albeit less so towards FreeZoners. They are fooling themselves for free.) The CoS as an organizaton however I consider an enemy of freedom and of free people. They have shown this in their litigation. >The responses would have me in an endless debate on every minor point, >yet they all avoided the major premise completely. So I'll be more >succinct: > >What do you know to be fact, personally, yourself, with firsthand >knowledge - what do you *actually* know about the CoS? Answer that. 1. They have a history of institutionalized criminality. 2. They have a history of suing people barratrously. 3. They have taken actions in the past year online that define them as an enemy of the net. 4. They base their religion on psuedo-scientific bunkum. The authenticity of the OT materials referred to here is confirmed by the CoS to the extent that they are suing Dennis for posting critiques with quotes. Those documents are filled with lies. -- Bill Stewart-Cole What is Stewart-Cole Consulting? Hell if I know. I'll find out when I finish the web page. If the above isn't PGP signed, I *might* not have written it.

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank