§ Legal Archive || Wog Media || Cult Media || CoW ® || Writings || Fun || Disclaimer || Contact §

   

    

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=Xns92BDE0285EF7Cmirelesonicnet%40208.201.224.154&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Gerry Armstrong: Bald-faced liar
From: Deana Holmes <mirele@sonic.net>
References: <t6gcsu03l6mu56i0df0aj7rbp7t5qf77gb@4ax.com>
Organization: Scientology Killed Lisa McPherson
Message-ID: <Xns92BDE0285EF7Cmirelesonicnet@208.201.224.154>
User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25
Lines: 294
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 05:01:16 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.24.211.76
X-Complaints-To: abuse@sonic.net
X-Trace: typhoon.sonic.net 1036558876 64.24.211.76 (Tue, 05 Nov 2002 21:01:16 PST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2002 21:01:16 PST


The following is the entire correspondence between Gerry Armstrong and
myself. It does not prove Gerry's argument, that my email to him somehow
caused Caroline Letkeman to withdraw herself as a witness from the case. It
also shows that I was speaking only for myself when I wrote to Gerry. I am
posting it here because Gerry publicly accused me of things that are not
true. Gerry should not have the ability to hide behind his email when he is
telling bald-faced lies.

In the future, Gerry, if you're offended about something I wrote, don't
make up lies and post them to endear yourself to others. It will come back
on you.

[Gerry Armstrong's original post]

From: Gerry Armstrong <gerryarmstrong@telus.net>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Lisa McPherson/Caroline Letkeman
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 18:13:13 -0700
Organization: Lightlink Internet
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <c907buk3elp26ltjpdk9fq2gpvlggin6os@4ax.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.34.12
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.232.125.58
X-Original-Trace: 9 Apr 2002 21:16:33 -0400, 216.232.125.58


Scientology knows all about this, so there's no sense to withhold the
fact from our group of friends and supporters.

I have no idea why this wasn't posted by the people covering the
litigation.

I understand that Caroline was named by Ken Dandar in court on March
28 as a witness in the Lisa McPherson case.

This is of course very scary to us both, because Caroline is already
fair game, already a target for her famous essay, for her studied
website http://www.entheta.ca/caroline/, her well reasoned, well
researched and gentle essays and comments on a.r.s., her nagging
demand for a refund of all the money Scientology ripped off, her utter
defiance of David Miscavige personally in all this fair game, her
steadfast goal to be reunited with her daughter, and her unshakeable
connection to me.

And it is also scary because the Lisa McPherson litigation involves
powers and players far beyond whatever the pleadings say. Others whose
task she is being asked to do have been fair gamed from the case.

She is, as God would have it, the best possible expert on Scientology
that no money could buy. She has a mind to die for. She's also very
new to all this, and will be for various periods of time a long way
from where she now calls home.

I hope the Tampa Bay opposition will connect up with her, because she
really is vulnerable in this part of the world doing what she's doing,
and because for obvious security reasons I have to be here.

We thought our friends and supporters would want to know.

She sure is in my prayers in all this.

(c) Gerry Armstrong


[My email to Gerry]

Subject: Re: Lisa McPherson/Caroline Letkeman
Newsgroups: sonic:alt.religion.scientology
To: Gerry Armstrong <gerryarmstrong@telus.net>
References: <c907buk3elp26ltjpdk9fq2gpvlggin6os@4ax.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 18:44:32 -0700
Lines: 12
X-ID: <Default> Deana M.
Holmes mirele@sonic.net mirele@sonic.net Knights of Xenu,
Valley of the Sun Chapter mirelesonicnet C:\XNEWS\sig.txt
X-Status: 27

On 09 Apr 2002, you wrote in alt.religion.scientology:

> I have no idea why this wasn't posted by the people covering the
> litigation.

Speaking only for myself, it is my belief, Gerry, that Ken doesn't want to
try this on the Internet. I'm not sure why you felt possessed to announce
this to the world but it certainly wasn't very discreet (again, in my own
opinion.)

Deana Holmes
mirele@sonic.net

[Gerry's first email response to me]

Received: by ultra.sonic.net (mbox mirele)
(with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.31 1998/05/13) Tue Apr 9 19:11:09 2002)
X-From_: gerryarmstrong@telus.net Tue Apr 9 19:10:19 2002
Return-Path: gerryarmstrong@telus.net
Received: from priv-edtnes04-hme0.telusplanet.net (fepout2.telus.net
[199.185.220.237])
by turbo.sonic.net (8.11.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id g3A2AJZ07652
for <mirele@sonic.net>; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 19:10:19 -0700
X-envelope-info: <gerryarmstrong@telus.net>
Received: from user.telus.net ([216.232.125.58])
by priv-edtnes04-hme0.telusplanet.net
(InterMail vM.5.01.04.01 201-253-122-122-101-20011014) with ESMTP
id <20020410021013.UCVH20279.priv-edtnes04-
hme0.telusplanet.net@user.telus.net>
for <mirele@sonic.net>; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 20:10:13 -0600
Message-Id: <4.3.2.20020409185107.00b97e00@pop.telus.net>
X-Sender: a6b73032@pop.telus.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 19:09:50 -0700
To: "Deana M. Holmes" <mirele@sonic.net>
From: Gerry Armstrong <gerryarmstrong@telus.net>
Subject: Re: Lisa McPherson/Caroline Letkeman
In-Reply-To: <200204100142.g3A1fxZ21002@turbo.sonic.net>
References: <c907buk3elp26ltjpdk9fq2gpvlggin6os@4ax.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-PMFLAGS: 36176000 0 1 P79D50.CNM

At 06:42 PM 4/9/02 -0700, you wrote:
>On 09 Apr 2002, you wrote in alt.religion.scientology:
>
> > I have no idea why this wasn't posted by the people covering the
> > litigation.
>
>Speaking only for myself, it is my belief, Gerry, that Ken doesn't want to
>try this on the Internet.

What does this have to do with trying the case on the Internet?

You report, or somebody reports, things.

Has a case ever been tried on the Internet? What do you mean?

> I'm not sure why you felt possessed to announce
>this to the world but it certainly wasn't very discreet (again, in my own
>opinion.)

How could it possibly be indiscreet? Scientology knows.

If you're saying what I think you're saying, I think it's a bad philosophy.

Why do you say I felt possessed when I most clearly wasn't?

The question is, why, if Scientology knows, would you feel possessed in
this circumstance to withhold the information from the world?

But surely you understand that Caroline's security is more important than
her testimony in the Lisa McPherson case, even if to it is added the
advantage you gain by your almost certainly inadvisable discretion.

Do you think I have no right to be involved in Caroline's security?

Gerry


>Deana Holmes
>mirele@sonic.net

[Gerry's second email response to me]

Received: by buzz.sonic.net (mbox mirele)
(with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.31 1998/05/13) Wed Apr 17 07:01:05 2002)
X-From_: gerryarmstrong@telus.net Wed Apr 17 06:57:55 2002
Return-Path: gerryarmstrong@telus.net
Received: from priv-edtnes16-hme0.telusplanet.net (defout.telus.net
[199.185.220.240])
by turbo.sonic.net (8.11.6/8.8.5) with ESMTP id g3HDvt119045
for <mirele@sonic.net>; Wed, 17 Apr 2002 06:57:55 -0700
X-envelope-info: <gerryarmstrong@telus.net>
Received: from user.telus.net ([216.232.120.199])
by priv-edtnes16-hme0.telusplanet.net
(InterMail vM.5.01.04.02 201-253-122-122-102-20011128) with ESMTP
id <20020417135753.KJUU23644.priv-edtnes16-
hme0.telusplanet.net@user.telus.net>
for <mirele@sonic.net>; Wed, 17 Apr 2002 07:57:53 -0600
Message-Id: <4.3.2.20020413081202.00b81690@pop.telus.net>
X-Sender: a6b73032@pop.telus.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 06:56:07 -0700
To: mirele@sonic.net
From: Gerry Armstrong <gerryarmstrong@telus.net>
Subject: Lisa McPherson/Caroline Letkeman
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-PMFLAGS: 35127424 0 1 P19700.CNM

Hi Deana:

You haven't answered my e-mail and questions to you.

[Quote]

To: "Deana M. Holmes" <mirele@sonic.net> Subject: Re: Lisa
McPherson/Caroline Letkeman
At 06:42 PM 4/9/02 -0700, you wrote:
On 09 Apr 2002, you wrote in alt.religion.scientology:

> I have no idea why this wasn't posted by the people covering the
> litigation.

Speaking only for myself, it is my belief, Gerry, that Ken doesn't want to
try this on the Internet.

What does this have to do with trying the case on the Internet?

You report, or somebody reports, things.

Has a case ever been tried on the Internet? What do you mean?

I'm not sure why you felt possessed to announce
this to the world but it certainly wasn't very discreet (again, in my own
opinion.)

How could it possibly be indiscreet? Scientology knows.

If you're saying what I think you're saying, I think it's a bad philosophy.

Why do you say I felt possessed when I most clearly wasn't?

The question is, why, if Scientology knows, would you feel possessed in
this circumstance to withhold the information from the world?

But surely you understand that Caroline's security is more important than
her testimony in the Lisa McPherson case, even if to it is added the
advantage you gain by your almost certainly inadvisable discretion.

Do you think I have no right to be involved in Caroline's security?

Gerry


Deana Holmes
mirele@sonic.net

[End Quote]

I understand that you were on chat after this, again asserting that I was
indiscreet. How much more indiscreet could you be?

Since this is a subject which is important and since you've been making
this ridiculous charge of "indiscretion" about me, do you mind if I post
your communication and my response to a.r.s. to clear the air?

I do want to thank you for your complete lack of support for Caroline and
me, and your efforts to undermine us, because it all helped show us the
sort of support she and we would get if she had proceeded to participate in
the case.

In any event, now that Caroline will not be testifying and Bill Franks
will, would you mind answering my response to your "indiscretion" charge?

Gerry


[My response to Gerry]

X-cs: R
From: Mirele <mirele@sonic.net>
X-RS-ID: <Default>
X-RS-Flags: 0,0,1,1,0,0,0
X-RS-Header: In-reply-to: <4.3.2.20020413081202.00b81690@pop.telus.net>
X-RS-Sigset: 0
To: Gerry Armstrong <gerryarmstrong@telus.net>
Subject: Re: Lisa McPherson/Caroline Letkeman
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 07:05:57 -0700

On 17 Apr 2002 at 6:56, Gerry Armstrong wrote:

> Hi Deana:
>
> You haven't answered my e-mail and questions to you.

Gerry, I see no reason to answer your questions. I don't think you're
interested in answers.

Deana M. Holmes
mirele@sonic.net

[End]

Deana M. Holmes
mirele@sonic.net

 

Thread

 

§ Legal Archive || Wog Media || Cult Media || CoW ® || Writings || Fun || Disclaimer || Contact §