Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: dennis.l.erlich@support.com
Subject: MORE LIES YOUR DENNIS
Message-ID: <9511020600.08FQ200@support.com>
Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150
X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.35
Distribution: world
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 95 06:00:20 -0800
Lines: 76


an191579@anon.penet.fi (Paper Tiger)

><wolftrip@micron.net> wrote:
>dennis.l.erlich@support.com wrote:
>[snip]
>> Me:
>> >    I've been posting to ars since July 94.  If anyone thinks I've
>> >    lied about something, they should quote my statement (not like
>> >    Woof with the "majority of big-breasted women" misattribution
>> >    or generally questioning my sincerity) and produce credible
>> >    evidence of the falsehood.
>>
>> Woof:
>> >What? You mean you *didn't* say that?
>>
>>    No, *sshole.  You did.  I said there were some.  You made it
>>    a "large majority."  You wanna twist my words?

P.Tiger:
>Nope. It was attributed to you in a thread last week,
>[snip]
>
>  I hate to break into the middle of this, but I believe Dennis is
>  correct.  Dennis's original contribution to the "large brested
>  women" topic, started by Peter McDermott, was:
>
>On Sun, 15 Oct 95 10:05:29 -0700, 
>In Message-ID: <9510151005.0E6D800@support.com>,
>dennis.l.erlich@support.com wrote:
>[snip]
>Peter:
>>Don't forget the titty bars. Many female scientologists work as
>>lap dancers and in titty bars to drum up the BIG BUCKS needed for
>>that next step on the bridge.
>
>    This was actually true, at least when I was at an outer
>    (public) org, like LA Org.  A noticible percentage of the
>                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>    large breasted women were toppless/nude dancers.
>
>>So the next time you're about to stick that ten spot into her G-string
>>just remember -- it could be going to buy Gene Ingram's next blow job!
>
>    There were one or two hookers, too.
>
>  Dennis only says "a noticable percentage", which is open to some
>  interpretation, but I wouldn't call it a majority.  YMMV.
>
>  Wolf's first contribution (that I could find by grepping for
>  "breast", "tit", and "majority" - quite an entertaining evening!)
>  was this:
>
>On 27 Oct 1995 15:28:57 -0400,
>In Message-ID: <46rbtp$n2c@newsbf02.news.aol.com>,
>dwtripp@aol.com (DWTripp) wrote:
>[snip]
>I see no reason to distrust the statements of CofS posters. I know their
>intentions and the areas where they BS are easy to spot - certainly you'll
>agree with that? Since I'm unsure of what Erlich's intentions are, I'll
>retain by basic distrust of statements he makes that appear shakey. Good
>example is the assertion and resultant dialog about the "large majority"
>                                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>of big-titted women at LA Org in the early 70's being strippers or even
>hookers. Explain that one.
>
>   ** Paper Tiger (SP3, LFDoX)
       
    That's what I've been saying.  Woofboy is jerkin' the 
    newsgroup around and trying to make a d*mn foo out of YHN.
    
            +--------------------------------------+
           Rev. Dennis L Erlich  * * the inFormer * *
      dennis.l.erlich@support.com  +  inForm@primenet.com
                           "tar baby"