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

     
 
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Sayonawa for now
From: "kady@wwwaif.net" <kady@wwwaif.net>
References: <kkvepv4at5ukj5qd9lpudg5nt5ts4hg9er@4ax.com> <3f97fd3b@news2.lightlink.com> <Xns941D817EEE165kadywwwaifnet@205.232.34.12> <3f98213b@news2.lightlink.com>
Message-ID: <Xns941DA0C0157Fkadywwwaifnet@205.232.34.12>
User-Agent: Xnews/05.08.12
NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.230.20.175
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.230.20.175
Date: 23 Oct 2003 15:46:21 -0400
X-Trace: 23 Oct 2003 15:46:21 -0400, 64.230.20.175
X-Original-Trace: 23 Oct 2003 15:46:21 -0400, 64.230.20.175
Organization: Lightlink Internet
Lines: 154
Path: news2.lightlink.com
Xref: news2.lightlink.com alt.religion.scientology:1651523

"Magoo" <Magoo44@worldnet.att.net> wrote in
news:3f98213b@news2.lightlink.com:
>> Do you think OSA is working through Gerry and Warrior, and has
>> convinced them to launch these attacks? If so, why don't you suggest to
>> Warrior and Gerry, specifically and explicitly, that they knock it off,
>> so that people like ptsc don't get the impression that for most a.r.s.
>> critics, it's totally appropriate to behave like an OSA thug if your
>> name happens to be "Gerry Armstrong"?
>
> Kady...
>
> I HAVE posted over and over and OVER that OSA's Main targets are to
> 1) Drive any 'hot' topics off of ARS
> 2) Turn the critics against each other, and black PR them to each other
> 3) Utterly destroy ARS by making it seem like only crazy people post
> here. If you've missed those, please look back. I've said it over
> and over

I know you do. I mentioned in the very post to which you are responding
that you say it over and over, sometimes posting it three or four times a
day. What I am trying very hard to get through to you is that it does not
apply to every single dispute between critics. It just doesn't. Hubbard's
third party law just doesn't hold water. Two critics can disagree when one
disagrees with the behaviour of the other, which is what happened in the
case immediately at hand vis a vis ptsc and the Church of Gerryology.

It *does not matter* what OSA may or may not do. OSA has *nothing at all*
to do with the dispute, other than the fact that Gerry is *acting* like OSA
with his demented, paranoid hate pages, and Warrior is *reposting OSA
claims* in an effort to stop ptsc from criticizing Gerry's demented,
paranoid hate pages. Do you understand this?


> and over.
> I refuse to get into these utterly STUPID fights between critics.

Well, if you're not willing to take the trouble to find out the issues
under dispute in a particular thread, such as this one, perhaps you
shouldn't wade into the fray solely to demonstrate an apparent ignorance of
what is actually being debated.

> I try to post information and facts, and that's it. I don't read MOST Of
> ARS, never have, never will...mainly due to time.

If you don't know the facts, and have no interest in really understanding
why someone like ptsc feels the way he does, I'm not sure why you bothered
to follow up to his post in the first place.


>
> First off, of course I've said one word! I've probably repetatively said
> more words than many, posting OSA's goals and purposes, which these
> fights feed.
> As I've said, I refuse to contribute to tearing any critics that I KNOW
> are critics apart. I know both Ptsc, and warrior, and gerry are critics
> and X-Scientologists. I don't know what the Hell is between all of this,
> but I can promise you it isn't an accident.

You're right. It's not an accident. "All this" came about the one person
who is less able to handle any criticism, no matter how mild, of Gerry
Armtrong than Gerry Armstrong himself is Warrior. In response to somewhat
less mild criticism from Cerridwen, ptsc and myself over a dumb claim made
by Gerry on whether a forgery was likely made by the individual targeted by
the forgery itself, Warrior began to post OSA-created dead agent material
on ptsc in order to shut him up, as well as anything else he could possibly
dredge up from the depths of Google that he believes will make Cerridwen,
ptsc and myself look bad. That is what caused the current situation. It is
not an accident, you're right.


>
> To try to dive into it, seems worthless and just fule to an already
> burning
> fire. I know...I've sat with OSA when they've laughed their asses off:
> "Now they're fighting amongst themselves!!!!!" This is a HUGE product
> for them, and takes ALL attention off of
> Scientology...which...ummmm....IS their goal. So no, you won't see me
> taking sides. It's insane, and should not be...period.

I really think you should consider looking at dynamics on a.r.s. as
something other than an OSA stat. The world of criticdom is really not as
black/white as you seem to believe that it is, and there are complex
reasons why there are very real disagreements amongst critics. Those
complex reasons are not Bill Yaude, Bill Yaude and Bill Yaude. I think if
you would read threads like this with an open mind, rather than always
looking for Bill Yaude behind it all, you might get a better idea of how
rich and diverse in opinion the critical community is.


> I'm not against Gerry, Warrior or ptsc....and I'm Certainly not for
> these postings of known critics as OSA. Come on! If they're pissed at
> each other, I suggest one thing: Pick up the GD phone! This constant
> blah blah blah can be endless, and one conversation can 'cure' a lot!

Why on earth would ptsc want to pick up the phone and call a person who is
knowingly and deliberately posting distorted lies that were explicitly
prepared by OSA several years earlier in an illfated attempt to discredit
him?

> Well...you ball me out for NOT saying something, yet you completely
> invalidate what *I* feel is KEY to this entire thing. Sorry, you fix it
> then.

While your observations on OSA and the Internet may be valuable, they are
pretty much irrelevant in this particular debate, since OSA is simply not
involved, except as the source of Warrior's campaign to dead agent someone
who dared to criticize Gerry Armtrong.

There's a saying that goes, "When the only tool you have is a hammer,
everything starts to look like a nail." I think that in some ways, Bill
Yaude and OSA are your explanatory "hammer". You don't seem to be willing
to look beyond that one element in order to determine the reason behind
what critics may say or do on a.r.s., and I think you might find yourself
surprised at what you would conclude if you did.


>>
>> Maybe he believes that critics ARE "lazy as fuck". It would be possible
>> to believe this without being somehow directed by OSA.
>
> Ya................................sure......OSA had nothing to do with
> three top critics totally at each others throats. Come on,
> Kady....please!

See, again, by your own words, you admit that you don't know the subject,
or the specifics, of this particular dispute between "three top critics."
You seemingly have no interest in actually finding out, since somehow, in
your mind, that isn't important, since it just *has* to be OSA and Bill
Yaude behind it. That's really simplistic, and in this case, quite
inaccurate. It is frustrating, because it reminds me of the reaction of
some Scientologists, when confronted by critical information, who refuse to
actually read it, and think about it, but only discount it since it is just
"entheta" and a product of "Scientology enemies". Don't fall into that same
trap.

>> If there is one thing that I hope you get from this exchange, it's the
>> realization that it is possible to disagree - sometimes strongly - with
>> other critics on a.r.s. without a sinister OSA plan leading to that
>> disagreement.
>
> I never said there wasn't. However, when people are as strongly against
> each other, this isn't a disagreement, this is a product. Either you've
> been with OSA or you haven't. If you have, you understand what's going
> on. If you haven't worked with them,

Please read what I wrote above. I just can't agree with you on this point,
and since you've said you don't have any desire to actually find out what
the issue is that has caused the disagreement in the first place, which
you've decided, without any investigation or evidence at all, is OSA, I
don't think we've much left to add to this thread.

K

 

 
 

Thread

 

 

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