http://www.google.com/groups?selm=16ml9u0becvd51pfdoq3s9ug7j7hkke4o2%
404ax.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
From: Gerry Armstrong <gerryarmstrong@telus.net>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: McPherson litigation.TR-3ing Claire (was:
Disgusted)
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 23:14:09 -0800
Organization: Lightlink Internet
Lines: 129
Message-ID: <16ml9u0becvd51pfdoq3s9ug7j7hkke4o2@4ax.com>
References: <3c93bf4a$2@news2.lightlink.com> <
rsf79ucg46o2uguutp6b2oadv81bf8c8f7@4ax.com>
<3c93c5db@news2.lightlink.com> <le4f9u4aers3mp7kb7bcdm987sal2e5spb
@4ax.com>
<3c97dad1@news2.lightlink.com>
<jjSl8.2546$MC5.215966@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>
<MPG.170193285ee890f0989783@news2.lightlink.com> <
h7uf9u8r7d4680alvlib6nattnp029n40n@4ax.com>
<MPG.1701ee6a2088c74d989786@news2.lightlink.com> <
j6jl9ukb2pv6m40vvq08s1e1fcfhfvdun6@4ax.com>
<MPG.17047441227023629897c0@news2.lightlink.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.34.12
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.232.125.58
X-Original-Trace: 22 Mar 2002 02:17:28 -0500, 216.232.125.58
On Thu, 21 Mar 2002 22:51:16 -0800, Zinj <zinjifar@yahoo.com> wrote:
>In article <j6jl9ukb2pv6m40vvq08s1e1fcfhfvdun6@4ax.com>,
>gerryarmstrong@telus.net says...
>> On Wed, 20 Mar 2002 00:55:46 -0800, Zinj <zinjifar@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>>
>
><snip because it's available in its entirety if you care>
>
>> Your assertion that I used the "tech" by repeating
something,
no
>> matter how many times, is false. Now please withdraw your false
>> accusation against me.
>>
>> Or, conversely, you might acknowledge that any time you repeat
>> anything you yourself are using Hubbard tech. I therefore am *not*
the
>> one using the "tech," but you are by your own admission.
>>
>> But why not do the honest thing and admit that I was *not* using
their
>> "tech" and your accusatioin that I was is false?
>>
>> Your justification for claiming that I was using the "tech"
on Claire
>> is baseless and pathetic.
>>
>> >
>> >Beyond that, the Black Dianetic nature of the repetition is as
obvious
>> >as a Laserclam pseudo-freudianism.
>>
>> Is it now? I say you're a liar. I say repetiton of a matter is
>> absolutely unrelated to Hubbard tech. You say it must be. BS.
>>
>
>What can I do but shrug? If I'm wrong, and the Black Dianetic nature
>of the hypnotic repetition *isn't* obvious... than at most I'm wrong.
That's good enough.
>
>Well, *unless* I'm an agent of Scientology, sent to Black PR you. In
>*that* case, I might be a liar, instead of just wrong.
That could be. Your "handling" of me would indicate that. But it
isn't
important. You've apologized once tonight, and pretty well
acknowledged here that you're wrong about me. I don't need anything
else at this time.
Thanks.
(c) Gerry Armstrong
>
>Zinj
>
>
>> The Hubbard "tech" involved here is the denial of logic or
reason.
>> That is Claire's "tech," and Hubbard's "tech,"
and
you're using this
>> "tech" here. You're denying reason in order to mock up a
platform
to
>> attack me.
>>
>> Why not go back and address my whole post to Claire with reason. The
>> first conclusion you unreasonably jumped to is false.
>>
>> (c) Gerry Armstrong
>>
>> >
>> >Zinj
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >Zinj
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> > > And thus far, you have utterly
>> >> >> > > failed to support your averment with
anything
other than this shoddy
>> >> >> > > attack.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Guess you missed the post I wrote earlier
today
on that same thread, then.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Not that I had any obligation to you or to
anyone
else to write it.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > But what you state as fact is too
important
to simply ignore the
>> >> >> > > support you give it here, even if it is
only,
as it is, this ad
>> >> >> > > hominem attack.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > It was prompted by your rudeness and
misquotation
of what I'd written. You
>> >> >> > couldn't have gotten what I said more wrong if
you tried.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I do not apologize for having written that
anymore
than you'd apologize
for
>> >> >> > the various idiotic and rude things you've
said
to me over the years.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Get over it.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > And how very odd that you'd feel the need to
TR3
something that I'd
already
>> >> >> > written earlier today AND that it wasn't an
actual
TR3. It was a different
>> >> >> > issue- what I said to/about YOU.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > This post does not constitute a TR3. It is
your
commentary on what I said
to
>> >> >> > you. Period.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It is such a relief to see someone else try what I
have tried to do with
>> >> >> Claire, and see her handle him the EXACT same way
that
she has handled me. I
>> >> >> was thinking that I was the only one who this
happened
to.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Gerry - I am a witness. Your post was extremely
polite,
and iron-clad in its
>> >> >> reasoning.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You left every opportunity for Claire to respond in
like manner.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Instead, she returned the steamiest, the chunkiest,
and the smelliest shit I
>> >> >> have ever seen smeared in anyone's face.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Seems to me that Claire needs an enema.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Poopsy
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>