Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology From: dennis.l.erlich@support.com Subject: "I CAN SPEAK." Organization: L.A. Valley College Public BBS (818)985-7150 X-Mailer: TBBS/PIMP v3.35 Distribution: world Date: Mon, 20 May 96 08:20:41 -0700 Lines: 91 av282@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Martin G. V. Hunt) Freewolf (EWOLFE@wnstar.com) writes: >>> Why is an effort being made by critics to prove that Lonesome Squirrel is >>> fictional? Martin: >>It's an ego trip. A subtle one, though. It's based on who's the >>biggest, baddest critic. Who can argue to the point of absurdity. >>Who can take a subject, any subject, and keep tearing strips out >>of it until there's no flesh left on the bones. Me: > I'm surprised at this accusation, Martin. In case you haven't > noticed, the squirrely manuscript is loaded with misinformation. I > have a substantial investment in this newsgroup of time and effort > spent dispelling disinformation. Martin: >Actually, I hadn't noticed; I have to take your and the Mayo's word >for it. > >Thank you for pointing out errors. Pity really someone couldn't >go through it and state which things are correct and which aren't; I have insufficient interest. But ars is notorious for getting to the bottom of such issues. The subject has been raised. I'm willing to drop it, if that's the consensus. >I doubt anyone would be willing to devote the time, though, but >that means that for people like me who weren't in the GO or OSA >or at Flag, we will not know if a particular statement is correct >of not. Ah, well. I would expect Steve, if he cares to maintain any kind of freiendship with me, to take the high road and inform us as to the accuracy (lack of, actually) of the Tail. >Of course, many things in the book are factually correct; >I can vouch for some of the low level stuff as being how I remembered >it. The errors you and the Mayos have raised trouble me, though. >I could certainly wish the book had been corrected. It just needs proper labelling. That's all. Just tell us it's fiction, based on Steve's experiences in the cult. That's all he has to do. >BTW, someone mentioned that Steve was hypnotized to recall some >of the material in the book. If this is so, it explains why the >errors are there. Hypnotism is notorious for this. True. Anyone can be induced to remember anything. Auditing proves this conclusively. >A month ago, >I hypnotized a friend and had him recalling silly things like the color >of his shoelaces from a certain day ten years ago, or what a bit >of fence looked like from above. It's really not good at fishing >out bits of lost memory. I'm certainly no expert at it, but it >is very similar to Dn and Scn auditing, and I've done a lot of that. >I would say it's near useless as a tool for recovering memories. >Generating false memories, is more like it. FMS. Right. > If you think it's anything more than that motivating me to call > Steve out on his factual errors and get him to admit that the > loathsome manuscript is equal parts of fact and fancy, you are > entirely mistaken. > >Al right. I wasn't trying to impugn your motives, Oh yes you were. You said "It's an ego trip ..." If that ain't a pugn on my motives, I don't know what is. >just calling you on a line there. Okay, perhaps you are right, Martin. "Loaded with misinformation ..." may have been an overstatement. Strike that and insert "... themanuscript contains enough misinformation to call its accuracy as a whole, seriously into question." Better? Rev. Dennis L Erlich * * the inFormer * *