Path: rambo.bobo.net!xs4all!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!het.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.direct.ca!news-peer-west.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!207.155.183.80.MISMATCH!global-news-master From: inFormer@informer.org (Rev Dennis Erlich) Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology Subject: Re: "Shattered" minds Date: 21 Nov 1998 12:41:43 PST Organization: inFormer Ministry [a 501(c)3 non-profit, religious organization] "... in service of cult victims and their families." Lines: 103 Message-ID: <36612438.15051495@news.concentric.net> References: <36434818.32145259@news.tiac.net> <36526d02.43779474@news.tiac.net> <71ur44$n4n@enews2.newsguy.com> <3654234e.33527137@nntp.ix.netcom.com> <3655d896.2083312@news.concentric.net> <733ojd$kn@enews1.newsguy.com> <7348qn$356@enews3.newsguy.com> <36591f16.3389495@news.concentric.net> <3656d391.2564760@enews.newsguy.com> <365c0089.5916084@news.concentric.net> <36570bae.16931884@enews.newsguy.com> Reply-To: informer@informer.org NNTP-Posting-Host: ts028d28.lax-ca.concentric.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451 X-No-Archive: yes Xref: rambo.bobo.net alt.religion.scientology:146529 referen@bway.net (Diane Richardson): >On 21 Nov 1998 10:06:31 PST, inFormer@informer.org (Rev Dennis Erlich) >wrote: > >>referen@bway.net (Diane Richardson): >> >>>At the risk of having Godwin's law invoked, let's apply your >>>"blamethevictim" model to another example. >> >> I merely said that Rebecca's statement about the pre-shattered >>minds of cult victims could appear to some as "blamethevictim". > >No you didn't. You specifically related your "blamethevictim" >rationale to the Lisa McPherson case in the post I replied to. I >repeat that post below: >__________________________________ > >Rebecca wrote: >>As such, I don't think it's >>unreasonable to attribute her death at least as much to the stupidity of the >>individuals who were responsible for caring for her as to the Introspection >>Rundown (and, by extension, Scientology) itself. > >You replied: > No. Here is where you are completely wrong. This is what the >scienos themselves will eventually say when caught with the smoking >gun. > > "It's the people, not the organization." > > I call that, blamethevictim. >_____________________________________ Diane, shut tf up. Find someone else's mouth to put words into. >You stated Rebecca was "completely wrong" for placing an equal amount >of responsiblity upon the people involved in Lisa McPherson's death as >on the organization. >You attempted to misrepresent Rebecca's answer by turning her words >into "It's the people, not the organization." That is not what >Rebecca wrote. She wrote, and I believe, that Lisa McPherson's death >can be attributed to both the organization AND the people involved. So there's no argument and you should shut your bleedin' hole. >>>If you apply the same reasoning to the Nuremberg Trial cases, you >>>would find all the Nazi war criminals innocent of their crimes because >>>they were merely following the orders of their "organization." Those >>>Nazis, according to your model, would be victims instead of criminals. >> >> Not my contention, nor words. > >You stated above that Rebecca Hartong was "completely wrong" in >claiming that both the organization and the people involved were >responsible for Lisa McPherson's death. Jeeze, you're luzin it. >If we apply that logic to Lisa McPherson's death, her death is >attributed to the CoS organization, not the people responsible for >putting Hubbard's policies into action. >If we were to apply that logic to Nazi war crimes, the crimes >themselves would be considered the responsiblity of the Nazi regime, >not the individuals who followed the regime's orders. >Same thing, Dennis. Your word, your argument. Not mine. >I'm neither dragging you in the mud nor constructing a strawman. I'm >suggesting you think through the logical ramifications of your >strongly held opinions in this matter. Ramify this, Di. >>>I don't think that's what you really believe, but that's the >>>conclusion one must draw using your rationale. >> >> I don't have a rationale. I have a shattered mind, remember. >>Which I am trying to explore with Rebecca. [thankyouverymuch for >>sticking your nose in, di] > >I think you have a first-rate mind, Dennis. I think you stood up >against CoS policies you believed were wrong even when you were >in the cult. I most certainly did. >You had a personal moral code that the CoS couldn't >touch. You still do. Right. >As for sticking my nose in...hey, if you want this to be a private >conversation between you and Rebecca, take it to e-mail. I'm censoring you again. That's all. I'm telling you to keep your twisted rhetoric out of the thread and tasteless words out of my mouth. Rev Dennis Erlich * * the inFormer * *