From: Starshadow <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: CLairification of Fraud
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 08:03:37 -0800
Organization: Lightlink Internet
References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020530
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
X-Original-Trace: 3 Dec 2002 11:03:50 -0500, 184.108.40.206
> In article <3DEBFF90.email@example.com>, Starshadow wrote:
>>Oh, and one more thing. I did not give you, Caroline, permission to
>>archive my ng postings. I demand you remove them.
> In article <3DEBFF50.firstname.lastname@example.org>, Starshadow wrote:
>>I also don't put critics' disagreements with me up on DA webpages,
> When I asked, "Since 'DA' by definition consists of obtaining documentary
> proof that what was said consisted of lies, what is in the content of your
> posts that you object to?", you responded to my question in message
> <3DEC1912.email@example.com>, "In this case I should
> have said Black Propaganda."
> You seem to have responded that the content of your posts are black
> propaganda, since I asked what is in the content of your posts that
> you object to. If that's the case, I can understand why you want
> them removed. Will you be asking Google to remove them?
No, I think Caroline and
Gerry's characterization of anyone on that page
as belonging to some kind of goon squad with the letters OSA made large
is "black propaganda". Smiley aside, I don't think that's funny at all.
And I don't think your "humorous response" to me is very humorous since
you know damn well what they are doing with those pages. I thought
better of you, Warrior. Chalk one more up for my disappointment of
regular "critics". Yes, you do valuable work. But I'm rather annoyed
your pretend naivite as to what these two are doing.
I didn't give them permission
to archive my posts on such a page. Google
on the other hand has my permission to archive, otherwise I would have
typed a no archive header.
I am a bit hurt and angry
by your support of the tactics of these two
against anyone who speaks out disagreeing with them.
I thought better of you.
Starshadow, KoX, SP5, Official
Wiccan Chaplain ARSCC(wdne)
"Scientology in 1986, after fraud judgement in favor
of ex-member Lawrence Wollersheim --'Not one thin dime for
Scientology May 9, 2002 before final appeal--
86,746,430 Thin Dimes for Wollersheim." www.factnet.org
www.xenu.net --what the Church of Scientology doesn't want
you to see