http://www.google.com/groups?selm=3a950d9e.0%40news2.lightlink.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain

From: "Nelson" <nelsonjr@powersurfr.com>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: HAARP
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 06:02:39 -0700
Organization: Lightlink Internet
Lines: 244
Message-ID: <3a950d9e.0@news2.lightlink.com>
References: <3a92f65b.0@news2.lightlink.com> <g2e89tgs7gmirui1jlh5cc0scklbjtrplf@4ax.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.34.12
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.108.65.119

Yup,,, nothing said by Gerry here thats of value either.
Nelson
"Gerry Armstrong" <armstrong@dowco.com> wrote in message
news:g2e89tgs7gmirui1jlh5cc0scklbjtrplf@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2001 15:58:46 -0700, "Nelson" <nelsonjr@powersurfr.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Reading a bit of info on HAARP it seems very interesting WHY the
government
> >went threw such huge efforts to discredit the e-meter, Hubbard, and his
work
> ^^^^^
> Did you learn this as an audtr?
>
> >on the mind, thought and spirit.
>
> Okay, then you're saying that at some point the government ceased
> going through such huge efforts to discredit the e-meter, Hubbard, and
> his work on the mind, thought and spirit? So the government conceded
> by its cessation of its huge efforts that the e-meter, Hubbard, and
> his work on the mind, thought and spirit were credible?
>
> Or are they still going through such huge efforts to discredit the
> e-meter, Hubbard, and his work on the mind, thought and spirit.
>
> >And from his wisdom came the creed of the church of scientology.
> >http://www.scientology.org/video/creed.asx
>
> No, I'd say Hubbard lifted it from the United Nations Bill of Rights
> or whatever existed in very similar form before he codified his
> "creed." The $cientology "creed," of course, as with all
> $cientologists, was not the creed Hubbard lived by. No, he was what he
> feared and most and attacked for most of his life, a suppressive
> person.
>
> But folks, do go listen to the Hypocritical Oath. My oh my, what a
> theme for $cientology. You cannot be a $cientologist and live by your
> own "creed."
>
> >
> >Now read on about HAARP and tell me why "we of the church" must go?
>
> Because $cientology cannot be trusted. You rely on unreason, and a
> basic human right is the right to reason. Your knowledge of, writings
> about, and emotions and actions toward wogs (R) is to reasonable
> people unreasonable. The reasonable know that unreason and the
> unreasonable are a danger to them and to reason itself. Thus
> $cientology, the Cult of Unreason is opposed. And thus, being
> unreasonable, $cientology fair games unreason's opponents, rather than
> ever be reasonable. $cientology's only reasonable action at this point
> in its history is to sue for peace. We'll know it when it happens.
>
> $cientology can never take out of its scriptures its great
> transcendental command to $cientologists: Be unreasonable! That is why
> $cientologists must become born again wogs (R): Reason is Value! (R)
>
> Okay, now I'll go read what this is all about.
>
>
> >
> >Best regards = Nelson
> >
> >
> >.......................................................
> >What do I want you to know about HAARP? Imagine that it is 1943 and you
know
> >about the Manhattan project, which created the atomic bomb -- what do you
> >do? HAARP will make atomic bombs obsolete. It will affect you. It is not
a
> >matter of if, only how much. HAARP is a hit man with a contract on you.
Now
> >it is up to you to protect yourself, your family, your nation, your
world.
> >All of these are in fact at stake. What you do, or fail to do about HAARP
> >will effect every living thing on this planet. We need you to understand
> >this material and act now.
> >
> >Full text............
> >Editorial Reviews
> >The author, Jerry E. Smith, jerryesmith@mailcity.com , December 16, 1998
> >Answers to FAQs
> >I have had the pleasure of being interviewed recently on several radio
and
> >TV shows as well as personal appearances. Some questions keep coming up.
I
> >will answer a few here.
> >What is HAARP? HAARP stands for High-frequency Active Auroral Research
> >Program. The name and its location is about all we know for sure. HAARP
is
> >probably a Star Wars weapons system coming on line. Star Wars, Ronald
> >Reagan's SDI, was defunded by Congress, who told the military to
discontinue
> >this line of research. Congressional wishes didn't stop Ollie North and,
it
> >seems, didn't stop SDI either. What's more, HAARP is a weapon that you
and I
> >stand in the cross-hairs of. HAARP will effect you -- an me. You can say
I
> >am writing from "enlightened self-interest." I don't want to be a
> >down-winder of this thing -- which we will all be. I need your help to
bring
> >HAARP under control.
>
> Okay, I miss it on a quick look, what does this person want from me.
>
> >
> >What is my background? I am a professional writer. I am not a scientist,
I
> >have no degrees, I barely made it out of High School. My first sale was
in
> >1969. Mostly I have written short pieces of fiction and political
opinion. I
> >have also worked as a "ghost," writing and re-writing all or part of over
40
> >books. Additionally, I have been an environmental activist since the
1960s
> >and a conspiracy theorist since the 1970s. In the '60s I was a "leftist"
> >anti-war protestor and supporter of the one world government movement. By
> >the mid '70s I was old enough, and wise enough to have realized that the
> >architects of the NWO were technocrates who didn't give a damn about the
> >Constitution, much less the Bill of Rights.
>
> Eek. They can't give a more miniscule damn about the Constitution and
> the Bill of Rights than $cientology, surely? Or are you claiming the
> NWO architects are clams or clam-connected?
>
> > Today I am pretty much a
> >straight Jeffersonian Liberitarian. I am no longer a "leftist," but, on
the
> >other hand, I wouldn't call myself a right-winger, either. I still think
of
> >"patriots" as the short-haired Bozos who kept tring to beat me up in the
> >'60s. I like Birchers, but I still don't think I could date one...
> >
> >How did I get started on this book? My friend Jim Keith got a call from
his
> >publisher, Ron Hubbard at Illuminet Press. Ron told Jim that HAARP was
the
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Okay, this is what this is all about, right?
>
> >hottest topic on the Internet and asked him if he could write a book for
> >I-Net. Jim declined, as he was behind on contracts for four books at the
> >time. Jim, however, put Ron and I in touch. Here in Reno, Nevada, there
is a
> >group of writers, researchers, political activists and NWO watchers that
Jim
> >(sometimes) and I are active in (he calls 'em the "paranoia club"). I had
> >first heard of HAARP through this group. These folks, and their "patriot"
> >network, became my research team. When Ron asked me to write a book for
him
> >it was the perfect marriage of my environmental/political interests and a
> >desire to finally get my name on a book. Working as a ghost was not real
> >rewarding as I didn't get "by" lines. In one sense, my book is a leftist
> >environmental anti-government book disguised as a right-wing conspiracy
> >theory anti-government book... Angels Don't Play This HAARP had been out
> >only a few months when I started work on my book. As a free-lance editor
and
> >professional re-writer I found numerous things with Angels that I thought
> >needed correction. Mostly, it meanders about, with no clear development
of
> >the issue.
>
> Yep.
>
> > Also, I thought it was too technical for an introductory reader.
>
> Yep. I suppose everyone haarps on that.
>
>
> >My biggest complaint was its failure to ask the real question, who was
> >behind HAARP? What I set out to do was: first, put the material in clear
> >order. Second, look at what the science says this thing could do and ask
the
> >question, who would want to do that? I began work on the book in the
spring
> >of 1996. I submitted the mss. to Ron in the fall of that year. Ron,
however,
> >hated my first draft. I don't blame him, it was junk. Ron cancelled the
> >project, thinking that it would take me too long to correct the mss. for
him
> >to get the book into print in a timely fashion. I sat on the book for
about
> >a year. In the fall of 1997 I contacted David Hatcher Childress at
> >Adventures Unlimited Press. He was delighted to get the project. At that
> >same time I really lucked out to get one of Jim Keith's researchers, Bob
> >Sonderfan, to work for me full-time. I could not have done this book
without
> >Bob. He sat up all night on the Internet, went to the local university
> >library and tracked down original documents at the U. S. Government
Printing
> >Office. By the time I finished the fifth and final draft in the spring of
> >1998, Bob and I had filled a filling cabinet with health, environmental
and
> >military info on HAARP and related "black" projects.
>
> This would be a very valuable study.
>
> >The book doesn't have a
> >bibliography because it would be longer than the book!
> >
> >What do I want you to know about HAARP? Imagine that it is 1943 and you
know
> >about the Manhattan project, which created the atomic bomb -- what do you
> >do? HAARP will make atomic bombs obsolete.
>
> That wouldn't be so bad all by itself. As long as by their obsolesence
> you didn't mean that they no longer wouldn't explode.
>
> > It will affect you.
>
> Not if you're a thetan.
>
> I'm just making fun because this has been introduced into
> alt.religion.[$]cientology. I'm sure that all that can be known about
> HAARP should be made publicly public. Same with virtually everything
> else.
>
> > It is not a
> >matter of if, only how much. HAARP is a hit man with a contract on you.
>
> So they do work for $cientology.
>
> > Now
> >it is up to you to protect yourself, your family, your nation, your
world.
> >All of these are in fact at stake. What you do, or fail to do about HAARP
> >will effect every living thing on this planet. We need you to understand
> >this material and act now.
>
> Okay, I understand. This should be our game plan. First we take care
> of the $cientology problem. Then we take care of HAARP. Don't be on
> the wrong side of the planet, Nelson.
>
> (c) Gerry Armstrong
>
> >.................................................
> >

> >Best Regards = Nelson
> >
>