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




NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 07:01:07 -0600
From: referen@bway.net (Diane Richardson)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Goon Squad Trouper Tries New Song and Dance (was Re: CLairification of Fraud (was re: TECH Ouside COS. OT 1 Success))
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 13:01:11 GMT
Message-ID: <3dedf984.4476476@news.bway.net>
References: <3DE8D935.3060204@starshadowlovesxenu.net>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.21/32.243
Lines: 140
X-Trace: sv3-OBcMC/qP2eyS6bZS7gOglI04WnssqNB/SQ+TcRSnCklOM
X-Complaints-To: abuse@bway.net
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@bway.net
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.1

On Wed, 04 Dec 2002 11:38:27 +0100, Gerry Armstrong
<gerry@gerryarmstrong.org> wrote:

>On Tue, 03 Dec 2002 13:35:43 -0800, Starshadow
><starshadow@starshadowlovesxenu.net> wrote:
>>>>Now, are you going to remove my postings--which, again, I did NOT
>>>>authorize YOU to archive and whose copywrite remains mine--from your
>>>>stupid webpages or am I going to have to complain to your isp or phone
>>> Yes.
>>>>Not having CofS resources, I doubt I can sue, but I can make
>>>>complaint after complaint until you comply.
>>> Do you think we need your authorization to web your goony complaint
>>> after goony complaint?
>> Okayfine. You've declared war. So be it. I can't, as I said, afford
>>any batteries of copywrite lawyers,
>Oh don't be goofy.

There's nothing goofy about what Starshadow has written, except
for her spelling of copyright.

>The Scientology cult, I'm quite sure, would
>bankroll your lawsuit. Don't forget to write "this is okay" at the end
>of your CSW.

Perhaps you are not aware of the fact that intellectual property law
is utilized by people who have absolutely no connection to the Church
of Scientology. If that's the case, I advise you to learn more about
the subject.

>The cult loves to finance "individuals" to sue its fair game victims.
>You're doing their black PR work now. I'm sure they be happy if you
>fomented a little legal TA for them?

What makes you believe that Starshadow is doing work for the cult?
I would like to see the evidence upon which you base this claim. If
there is no such evidence, I'd appreciate it if you'd be honest enough
to admit it.

>>but I will be certain to point out
>>that you are violating MY copywrites to all and sundry.
>I don't imagine that you'll tell them at the same time that you're
>lying to them, right?

You and your current lover appear to believe that Starshadow
is lying. That's your opinion, but not necessarily the truth.

>You're just pretending to be stupid, right? Now I know I could be
>wrong when I say that, and if you can demonstrate in some way that
>your stupidity is not pretended I will correct my statement that it is

I think the people pretending to be stupid are you and your current
lover Caroline.

>We have a fair use right pursuant to international copyright laws to
>web each of your hate posts that we've webbed on the GOoN sQUaD
>FOLLIES page,

You have no such right under international copyright law. I could
do what you do and launch into a harangue over how you are lying,
but I think the problem is that you have no idea what "fair use"
constitutes, rather than that you are lying.

That would mean that rather than being a liar, you are just very,
very stupid.

>which all but the really goony pretending really hard to
>be really stupid can see is a completely non-commercial site. Your
>threats then make you ..... eek!.....a copyright terrorist.

Not at all. What Starshadow has done is show that she has a
far better understanding of copyright law than you do.

I guess that makes you the stupid one here.

>>People can judge
>>for themselves what kind of low life scum you are.
>That's why we have your hate posts in their complete pretended
>stupidity on the GOoN sQUaD FOLLIES page, and why we have provided
>links to the complete threads so that people can judge by seeing the
>whole context in which you've made these hate posts, and judge what
>sort of person, and for what motive such a person, would be calling
>the Scientology cult's major fair game victims "low life scum."

I'm sure you consider yourself the "cult's major fair game victims,"
but, once again, that is nothing more than your own personal opinion.
It's sort of the same kind of hubris Robert S. Minton, Jr., indulged
in before he decided to embrace Rinder.

I doubt Minton considers himself "Scientology Enemy No. 1" anymore.
I wonder how long it will be before you do the Minton dance with
Rinder yourself.

>> And to think I was once cordial with you. Bitch. I hope your karma
>>catches up with you soonest. And may your front wheels meet your rear
>>wheels in a close and loving embrace.
>Will you try to recruit your fellow trouper Garry Scarff to make your
>postulate stick?

Yet again, you attempt to force your "reality" on others. The
"troupe" you refer to is your own concoction, it's a part of your
own demented reality. That's fine, but don't expect others to accept
your twisted view of reality just because you invented it.

>f. Ingram also suggested tampering with FORD GREENE's
>automobile by severing its brakes lines in order to produce a
>serious accident. When I said to Ingram that it could also kill
>GREENE, INGRAM responded, "There's no loss in a dead fag." INGRAM
>also suggested orchestrating an accident involving GREENE on the
>Golden Gate Bridge that would result in GREENE's car going over
>the side of the Bridge.
>[End Quote]

What does this have to do with anything you've written above?

Diane Richardson




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