Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology From: dennis.l.erlich@support.com Subject: AB REVIEW..FOR TOM K. Message-ID: <9508081030.0ERFQ01@support.com> References: Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150 X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.35 Distribution: world Date: Tue, 08 Aug 95 10:30:29 -0700 Lines: 47 rogue@ccs.neu.edu (R Agent) >Suggesting that anon.penet.fi and caltech were >irrelevant from an information gathering viewpoint (ie they already >knew what they were ostensibly looking for), is byzantine. I've assumed that the Penet raid was after *all* the identities using the site. That's what the scienos asked for, wasn't it? The whole thing was probably a ruse to get the user list from the anonymous site. >Someone was suggesting that the whole caltech incident was staged just >to add credibility to OT. I'm glad you aren't following in that >delusion. This doesn't connect. >I'm not starting from -any- premise. It seems to be others who are >stsrting with the premise that she's guilty (of something). I'm being >skeptical of that. No. The premise is that she's deeply involved and perhaps even an agent of the scieno conspiracy that attempted to silence my access to internet, frame Tom, compromise Penet and generally trample all over everyone's free speech rights on internet. > RA Rogue, I find it curious that you didn't correct me when I falsely assumed that you were the one Tumor "deputized" to investigate. You've never been shy to correct me before, and I count on my friends for reality-checking and course correction. What gives? Why didn't you tell me I was wrong about it? I'm perplexed at your silence about my obvious error. Please explain. +--------------------------------------+ Rev. Dennis L Erlich * * the inFormer * * dennis.l.erlich@support.com + inForm@primenet.com "tar baby"