Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: dennis.l.erlich@support.com
Subject: LA ORG WOMEN
Message-ID: <9511180843.0C9GE00@support.com>
Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150
X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.35
Distribution: world
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 95 08:43:44 -0800
Lines: 94


rogue@ccs.neu.edu (R Agent)

>> This is a fair statement.  Whether Wolf is curerently "in comm" with OSA,
>> if they should decide Wolf would make a useful asset I'm sure they'd have
>> little difficulty acquiring him.  Sorry, Wolf.

Woof:
>No apologies needed. This comment, along with Diane's is indicative of
>how some on ARS view the world. I suppose there are many, such as yourselves,
>who cynically view humans as mere slaves to the dollar, assets to be
>acquired and cast aside at the whim of the evil corporate overlords. I will
>state, for the record, that I have never been, nor will I ever be
>"acquired" by anyone, of any stripe.

    A "cut a deal" kinda guy.

>It's how CoS sees things, so of necessity we must deal with that view.  It
>would be utter folly to refuse to recognize that's how they work.  That
>doesn't mean that I or any other critic approves of or practices it.

    Don't sprain your brin switching positions on us.  First you
    hold up as you idols the Masters of Disaster Fleshback
    Triplets and then you say you don't approve of greed?

    Those dots don't connect, Woof.

>Your
>statement has to be taken in the context of who we're dealing with.  This
>is the same organization that trains people to harrass, coerce, lie,
>perform covert actions.

    Tell us what you know about that.

Rogue:
>> Spot on.  You & I pretty clearly don't see eye to eye on a number of
>> issues, including Mr. Tripp. :) But that doesn't stop me from seeing that
>> your research is second to none, and appreciating your keen eye for detail
>> in peoples' statements.  I greatly value what you contribute here.

Woof:
>I'd have to disagree here RA, Diane's much vaunted research is purely
>restricted to maintaining her bias. I have posted here on numerous
>occassions my exact status and intentions. That she failed to archive
>that is testimony to her opinion, not any skill.

    And you have contradicted yourself, as above.

    You are trying to sell the losing argument that the cult
    isn't a religion.  Even though it is true, it could never be
    proven.  No.  We must bring the religion, kicking and
    screaming if necessary, *to* the law and make them obey it.

Rogue:
>I agree with you that Diane has blind spots,

    As we all do.

>but they mostly don't get in
>the way of her doing a superb job of getting to the heart of the matter.

    She does cut right through it.

>> Yes, I agree.  Wolf does have some motives he's being less than up front
>> about.  He's not been totally disingenuous, but there's some things he
>> could be more open about.
      
Woof:
>For example?
     
Rogue:
>Well, your antagonism towards Dennis and the reasons behind it, for one.

    We care why the "mean little Woofer" yaps and pretends he's
    gonna' bite?

>And which parts of the Tech you consider valuable and why for another.

    He agrees with anything you can sell to the marks.

>While you're at it you might want to give us your vision for what you want
>to happen to CoS and what specific actions we on a.r.s could do to bring
>it about (assuming we agree).  You've not said -nothing- about all of
>these, but there's been some ambiguity and a clear, precise post on each
>would help a lot.

    Yea, your vision of the ideal future for the cult.  Tell us, 
    O Yapping One.

            +--------------------------------------+
           Rev. Dennis L Erlich  * * the inFormer * *
      dennis.l.erlich@support.com  +  inForm@primenet.com
                           "tar baby"