§  What's New  ||  Search  ||  Legal Archive  ||  Wog Media  ||  Cult Media  ||  CoW ® ||  Writings  ||  Fun  ||  Disclaimer  ||  Contact  §

From: "Ball of Fluff" <cswazey@comcast.net>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
References: <kkvepv4at5ukj5qd9lpudg5nt5ts4hg9er@4ax.com> <3f97fd3b@news2.lightlink.com> <Xns941D817EEE165kadywwwaifnet@> <3f9aaf91$1@news2.lightlink.com> <1gdlpvg2t8u5mb818r789bi7rm184uk3rk@4ax.com> <3F9B0083.2030508@rochester.rr.com> <3f9b0352$1@news2.lightlink.com> <3F9C006A.70700@rochester.rr.com> <3fa0bc65$1@news2.lightlink.com> <3fa3fa03$1@news2.lightlink.com> <3FA441D0.9040405@rochester.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Sayonawa for now
Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 17:42:53 -0800
Lines: 81
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Message-ID: <3fa46098$1@news2.lightlink.com>
X-Trace: 1 Nov 2003 20:40:40 -0500,
X-Original-Trace: 1 Nov 2003 20:40:40 -0500,
Organization: Lightlink Internet
Path: news2.lightlink.com
Xref: news2.lightlink.com alt.religion.scientology:1653878

"Tanya Durni" <tdurni@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
> It is my belief that you are denying that you act like an indoctrinated
> scientologist.

Beep. Wrong answer. Or, to be more precise, utterly uninformative,
accusatory without giving specifics.

I don't post about my beliefs here. I don't discuss my wins. I don't defend
CofS. I don't defend Hubbard.

You have not given any examples- yet again- of what is allegedly
indoctrinated about me.

There are other Scn'ists such as Cerridwen, Ralph Hilton and Basic Basic
posting here who do not come in for this kind of ad hominem unspecific
poorly supported accusation from you.

> I think Gerry points out that you at times act like an
> indoctrinated scientologist

No, he's never used that term.

Irrelevant. I was discussing, with Kady, his approach vis a vis his web

Nothin' to do with what YOU think about me as a person.

Btw, still wonderin' with whom you "checked" when you said "Last I checked,
ars is a critic's forum" when you were commenting (taking exception to) my
posting here.

Nobody to check with. This is an unmoderated forum and there's no official
FAQ or moderator.

> and in doing so further OSA's objective in
> taking critism off of scientology and on to the person critizing it.

LOL. OSA can't stand me. They've shown this and I've discussed that fact.

I would say that those who further such objectives as OSA might have would
be those who slam other critics who criticize Hubbard and CofS. People such
as me, Cerridwen, Jommy Cross and the many others on Gerry's webpage and/or
have come in for more of your ad hominem and non sequiturish accusations
that contain no examples or specifics made.

I note you didn't answer the rest of my post.

I would guess it's because you cannot sufficiently address those comments.

Tell you what. Drop the ad hominem shit and just discuss the posts or
comments made by the various contributors rather than your bogus assumptions
(never supported, no examples given, always mendacious) of what that person
is like.

By the way, folks, this person who's levelling these unsupported and
unspecific allegations has repeatedly said on this forum (inappropriate.
Should have gone back channel with that, if at all) that she wanted to meet

As it happens, when I was handling my parents affairs, I passed right
through an area that I presumed was probably her neck of the woods. I also
knew I was going to be taking that route, beforehand.

But I didn't email or try to get in contact. I don't approve of the ad
hominems she has continually used regarding me or her lack of explanation of
why I am the only Scn'ist apparently singled out thusly.

I have met with a number of my fellow critics, IRL. I'm quite open to that.
But depends on the person and if they are capable of logic and civility.






§  What's New  ||  Search  ||  Legal Archive  ||  Wog Media  ||  Cult Media  ||  CoW ® ||  Writings  ||  Fun  ||  Disclaimer  ||  Contact  §