http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=n5a9tu839r67qsf2mjh3bfuhaipbvlvgqd% 404ax.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain

From: Gerry Armstrong <gerry@gerryarmstrong.org>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: THE REAL GERRY ARMSTRONG (repost)
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 09:25:48 +0100
Organization: 1&1 Internet AG
Lines: 341
Message-ID: <n5a9tu839r67qsf2mjh3bfuhaipbvlvgqd@4ax.com>
References: <ar0rs601ti@drn.newsguy.com> <f6058cf6.0211142300.7ef4e6cb@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pd9e15336.dip0.t-ipconnect.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: news.online.de 1037348729 25098 217.225.83.54 (15 Nov 2002 08:25: 29 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@online.de
NNTP-Posting-Date: 15 Nov 2002 08:25:29 GMT
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534

On 14 Nov 2002 23:00:16 -0800, ffracs@hotmail.com (Garry) wrote:

>Warrior < warrior@xenu.ca> wrote in message news:< ar0rs601ti@drn.newsguy.com>...
>> From: Warrior

>> Subject: Re: THE REAL GERRY ARMSTRONG
>> Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology, nl.scientology
>> Date: 2002-03-26 >
>>
>> Gerry Armstrong is a kind, loving individual, who, as Tory says,
>> got hard proof of the truth about L Ron Hubbard. For having been
>> in a position to discover the real truth about Hubbard, and for
>> having the courage to disseminate it so that others may be spared
>> from Scientology's ruthless practice of fair game, Gerry has been
>> the target of Scientology's hatred for more than 20 years.
>>
>> God Bless Gerry Armstrong. May he persevere.
>>
>> See The Gerry Armstrong Chronicle at http://armstrong.xenu.ca/
>>
>> Warrior - Sunshine disinfects
>> http://warrior.offlines.org
>>
>> In article <3ca0bfe0@news2.lightlink.com>, " Magoo" says...
>> >
>> >Having been "in" The C of S for 30 years I remember well the
>> >hatred spread so viciously about Gerry Armstrong. He truly (within C of
>> >S....and out, but for diff reasons :) is an entity of his own. They
>> >not only dislike Gerry Armstrong...they HATE him.
>> >
>> >What you write is just a taste of what is ~constantly~ pumped about him...
>> >or at least was to me, having volunteered for OSA on and off for 20 years.
>> >I truly thought he was all this man says, and much worse.
>> >
>> >It was not until I got out and realized the REAL reason they hate him
>> >sooooooo much, that it all began to fall into place. Gerry Armstrong was one
>> >of, if not the one person who had (and has) the actual EVIDENCE...written by
>> >Hubbard, that he is a complete liar, phony, and embellisher Extraordinaire.
>> >
>> >As Hubbard states: when someone is "nattering" (saying critical things) of
>> >another, it is solid proof they have done WAY worse. Your words are proof of
>> >your own ~seeekret~ actions, dearie.
>> >
>> >Gerry Armstrong has one thing you [Garry Scarff] do not:
>> >the guts to make a difference. Your childish rants only show how
>> >fearful this group is of him. Thanks for the confirmation.
>> >
>> >Tory/Magoo!
>
>Well, let's see...Warrior speaketh on April 10, 2002:
>
>From: Warrior (warrior@entheta.net)
>Subject: Re: GERRY ARMSTRONG: YOU OWE BEVERLY AN APOLOGY
>Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
>Date: 2002-04-10 19:35:22 PST
>
>Garry Scarff is full of BS. Despite his attempt to make it appear to
>be
>the case, Gerry Armstrong never made any covert or cruel remarks to
>Beverly.
>
>Therefore, no apology is needed from Gerry.
>
>CL and Garry Scarff should be the ones apologizing.
>
>Only sickos like CL and Garry Scarff would try to make this innocuous
>comment from Gerry into something it is not, was not, and never was
>intended to be.
>
>Here's what Beverly said:
>"Again, the most important thing is to bring ~ALL~ the heads of the
>Hydra
>in the open, and that way one knows what they are dealing with."
>
>Here's Gerry Armstrong's post in its entirety. Note that Gerry was
>responding to Beverly's statement regarding "heads of the Hydra", as
>in the Hydra known as *Scientology*. The discussion was about the
>cult.
>
>CL and Garry are obviously mentally deficient to even try to spin this
>into something else. Not to mention the fact that they have other
>motives for trying to chop Gerry down.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- --
>
>This was followed by reknowned Gerry-suck-up & apologist,
>Tory/Magoo....
>
>From: Magoo (magoo44@worldnet.att.net)
>Subject: Re: GERRY ARMSTRONG: YOU OWE BEVERLY AN APOLOGY
>Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
>Date: 2002-04-11 01:36:11 PST
>
>STOP IT>>>>>
>this sick kind of *crap* needs to stop.
>
>Honestly folks....there is a person here with much deeper feelings to
>deal
>with than any of this insensitive trashing.
>
>Garry....just as Warrior has said, you did far worse to Beverly years
>ago...so just stop all of this. It is sick, not nice, and only hurts
>someone
>who is a very kind girl, that both Gerry, Warrior, and I love...that
>being
>Beverly.
>
>Enough.
>
>Tory/Magoo~
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----
>
>And then this was followed by Beverly Rice herself who blasts
>Warrior's and Tory's contentions to smithereens and shows THE REAL
>GERRY ARMSTRONG:

Just to set the record straight about what follows, Beverly Rice
completely misinterpreted something I wrote back in April this year,
took it in a personal way that was unrelated to the way it was
intended, made a connection which didn't exist, and used it as a
certainty from which to attack me.

I don't know if she has come to realize that she was wrong in the
conclusion she reached that I intended what she thought I intended,
when I intended no such thing.

Garry Scarff is simply preying on Beverly's mistaken belief and
consequent baseless attack on me, as both he and the CL Op did back in
April, to further hurt Beverly and me, and maybe get Beverly to again
attack me.

Regarding Scarff's claim at the end of this post that Warrior and Tory
did not respond "after Beverly had her say," because they were
"embarassed and humiliated," of course they know why they didn't
respond if they didn't, and can adequately defend themselves from
Scarff's attacks. But in my opinion they didn't respond because they
are decent people who did not want to cause Beverly any more upset,
and they knew that I could adequately defend myself from Scarff's
attacks.

Gerry

>
>From: Beverly Rice (dbj1120@mpinet.net)
>Subject: Re: CLamelon Challenge No. 3 (or is that 4?)
>Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
>Date: 2002-04-14 18:53:33 PST
>
>
>Gerry Armstrong wrote:
>> Beverly Rice <dbj1120@mpinet.net> wrote:

>> >Gerry Armstrong wrote:

>> >> Oh, and don't go shooting at the heads

>> >Wow, and you have the nerve to accuse others of " cruel"
>> >communication.
>> >That was very ~covert~ of you, and ~very~ cruel.
>> >You have just demonstrated once and for all to me just how
>> >low you will go when you are taken off your pedestal.
>
>
>> How about if I didn't do whatever you say I did?
>
>
>But you did.
>
>Don't play any of your little mind games with me anymore,
>I know better because I know you.
>
>However, all you write is a good attempt for the benefit of
>others on the NG to CYA.
>
>I don't forget that you were Intel, and that you were the
>one that Hubbard relied on to straighten out "shore flaps"
>or "make things go right."
>
>You are very good with your sleight of hand, deflection and
>smooth tongued blather.
>
>
>> I saw what you posted here, and saw that you were attacking me, but
>
>
>Oh god, poor Gerry, always seeing "attacks" when being
>called on the carpet.
>
>I wasn't "attacking" you, I was directly addressing what
>you said.
>
>
>> didn't make the connection you made until an hour or two later. I
>> mention that to show how disconnected I was from the connection you
>> are making.
>
>
>The only thing you are disconnected from is any reality
>that you don't want to see or that isn't beneficial for
>you.
>
>Snip to Gerry's creation of a good shore story to correct
>a shore flap.
>
>
>> When I thought of "heads" it was in response to your image of chopping
>> off Scientology's heads. And my comment about being shot in the head
>> was because you had been, as I said, sniping at me,
>
>
>Oh, boo hoo. I disagree with you on certain issues, and I'm
>tired of you making every issue into an issue about your
>"persecution". I addressed you the same way I have others
>I think are FOS.
>
>You actually used to ~like~ that same tone of my posts
>when they were for ~your~ benefit, you said you admired
>my directness.
>
>And BTW, you have never anywhere even come close
>to using that expression before, no matter what excuse you
>create now for using it.
>
>
>> when I had been
>> doing exactly what you thought was so important to do. What you
>> likened to getting the Scientology heads on the block.
>
>
>No, you weren't, you continue to turn CST threads into
>attention that they are ops against you, and have not addressed
>questions that have been put to you. You make an issue that
>others should answer your questions, but aren't willing to
>do the same yourself.
>
>
>> Not for one second before or after writing what I wrote did I connect
>> it to Dave's death, and I do not now.
>
>
>Liar, but I know that you do, after all, have your reputation
>of being "humble" to protect.
>
>You know from the many talks we have had, and the many
>times I have broken down and cried with you, the effect
>of seeing anything talking about anything to do with
>"shooting" at "heads" has at tearing me apart.
>
>You know, because I shared this with you so many times,
>and also shared with you for years about the special
>therapy I was getting for the trauma of my husbands
>suicide, and the picture that was burned in to my mind
>of him after shooting himself in the head with all the
>blood and other horrible visual memories around it . . .
>
> not even to mention the talks we had about the mental
>and emotional impact and devastation it had on me.
>
>Don't even try to play innocent with me here on this one,
>although I know your replay is more for the NG than for
>me, because we both know that was an intentional, added,
>low blow from you
>
>I know full well the mind games that you play, but hey,
>I was the one that allowed it. No more.
>
>
>> I am truly sorry that you made
>> such a connection yourself, and that others are using this connection
>> that never existed for their own black PR purposes.
>
>
>No, you are truly sorry that you got busted and that I
>called you on the carpet openly.
>
>The hell with others black PR purps, black PR on ars is
>like breathing air, it's unavoidable. I don't let it
>dictate my life anymore, had enough of it, and learned
>that you just have to let it fall off your back.
>
>However, it is so typically Very Gerry for you to use
>what others may do to again deflect from your own
>cruelty.
>
>
>> Can you therefore forgive me for what never happened?
>
>
>This has nothing to do with forgiveness.
>
>And don't try to deflect away what you did by implying
>that it never happened. I'm all too familiar with your
>playing on words to get sucked up in to that anymore.
>
>
>Gerry blather follows:
>> And that is why forgiveness works at all. Because that which is
>> forgiven didn't happen, and that which needs to be forgiven didn't
>> happen.
>>
>> If you can forgive me for this thing which never happened, perhaps you
>> can forgive me for the other things which didn't happen. Knowing what
>> really happened, it can only be misinterpretations of what happened
>> (which misinterpretations would be things which never happened), for
>> which you can't forgive me. That's why forgiveness works.
>
>
>No, that's the way your holier-than-thou bullshit works.
>
>All this "it never really happened" crap you continually
>spew forth is merely a self-contrived out you have constructed
>for your own self for when you hurt others or need to
>avoid responsibility.
>
>You sure don't apply it when you refer to what you claim
>others have done to you, you keep hold of that stuff. Plus
>you even have written to others that you expect or want
>apologies. Hypocrite.
>
>
>> In any event, as I said, at no time did I connect it to Dave's tragic
>> death, and I do not now.
>
>
>Liar, see above.
>
>I'm tired of you playing things off as either being ignorant,
>innocent, unintentional, other peoples "misinterpretations",
> or just joking.
>
>You don't get it, it doesn't work anymore.
>
>
>Beverly
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----
>
>And it should be duly noted that after Beverly had her say, not a peep
>was heard from the embarassed and humiliated souls of Warrior or
>Magoo....

© Gerry Armstrong
http://www.gerryarmstrong.org

Thread