Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology From: dennis.l.erlich@support.com Subject: Tom/Linda debate a divers Message-ID: <9508111137.0GC4Z00@support.com> References: Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150 X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.35 Distribution: world Date: Fri, 11 Aug 95 11:37:45 -0700 Lines: 124 cultxpt@primenet.com (Jeff Jacobsen) > Why oh why are there so many posts about the Tom/Linda affair? Because there are contradictory facts being put forward about an important incident that had international, bad consequences for the rights of net.citizens? Just guessing. >I >don't see any new information in any of the posts; only griping and >whining. I've seen a couple of tasty new tidbits since we've begun focusing on it. The Cal Tech connection and the fact that first Tumor said -AB- (the central figrue in the Penet affair) gave her the info, and then when someone when back and showed that -AB- said he gave it to only Vega, it was suddenly Vega who gave it to the Tumor. Or is my memory failing? This is all fascinating new information to assimilate and (as pecker-wouldee say) evaluate. >Diane and Rogue, why don't you take your sniping over to e-mail???? Let's not have thin skins, Jeff. Rogue and Diane are both all grown up. I consider both my close friends. Both have done very good things and have added greatly to the flavor of the newsgroup. If they want to wrangle about the important connection between shutting of my internet access, the Blood Affair, and the Penet raid, who knows what about it and who's telling the truth, it is certainly pertainent to ars. > The subject of a.r.s. is supposed to be about Scientology. If you >want to snipe at Old Timer, do it in one thread and let it rest. Snipe isn't the word. I believe the phrase would be "call her on her threats". > Obviously there are 2 sides to this story. Linda's version and Tom's >version are opposing each other. This makes for a good mystery. Old >Timer prefers to stay in the background as much as possible. This makes >her a mysterious figure. When one shoves oneself publicly into an international incident which compromised the anonymity of thousands of people, and then attempts to retreat behind anonymity and inuendo, it is not mysterious. It is suspicious. And now you rush to her defense. She usta could speak for her lame self. Now she's got a whole cadre of defenders doing it for her. How OT. >Tom refuses to back up any of his claims as far >as I can tell. If he doesn't want to back up what he says, why does he >say it???? I wouldn't count on the fact that Tom will not back up his words with his actions. I know him. He's been pretty good at living up to his word, I'd say. Perhaps you should wait til his lawyers are finished with the issue to call him out on backing up his claims. You may still avoid looking more foolish. >Tom's posting of enticing but unsubstantiated information >only makes the mystery more enticing. Gee, it was Tumor who posted the threat of revealing the compromising information about Tom. Then she crawled away to be defended by her deputy g-man investigators. >If Tom wants to keep the mystery >going by his postings, he shouldn't then complain when people here >continue to speculate about it. Speculation is our God-given right. > Diane seems to enjoy the sniping more than anybody. I happen to know she *doesn't* enjoy it (and neither do I), but thinks it is important to keep the issue alive until we find out what happened to Tom, to -AB-, to Miss Blood (whatever her name really is), to Julf and to our rights. > However, IMHO all >this talk is useless and detracts from the actual subject; the evils of >Scientology. I believe we are looking at an example of those evils when we continue to focus on the Blood Attack/-AB-/Penet Affair. >Unless you have some verifyable information concerning this >topic, why don't you just keep quiet or use e-mail? I think you really, subconsciously, think that the issue should be kept public. Otherwise you would have e-mailed this to Diane and kept it off ars for comment. I think all this discussion (whether it generates any facts or not) helps to shape and define the spectrum of perspectives that the newsgroup represents. > Thank you. >Jeff Jacobsen SP3, Scientology critic And, no. I don't think you're working for OSA. I just think you are being zoomed. And not by me, Tom or Diane. Time will tell. +--------------------------------------+ Rev. Dennis L Erlich * * the inFormer * * dennis.l.erlich@support.com + inForm@primenet.com "tar baby"