Scientology

From: Joe's Garage <swatron@xenu.net>
Date: Sun, 28 May 2000 07:26:55 -0400
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96.1000528065424.134A-100000@darkstar.zippy>


No matter what anybody thinks about anybody else on this news group, you have to appreciate something in life. If nothing else, you have to appreciate that fact that we, as members of the human race, are capable of appreciation.

In that respect, if someone you hate receives recognition from a group you despise, you are still normally able to get over your own hatred and resentment long enough to say, "even though that is a person I hate and a group I despise, I acknowledge that people are not animals, but are capable of appreciation"

... unless you have been programmed to act in the unthinking mean-spiritedness of war.

In war, all is delusion. You are purposely deceived into thinking that your enemies are your friends and your friends are your enemies. To survive, you have to learn how to function, not by labels and stereotypes, but by actions. For example, saying "that person is an SP, so he is OK, but that person over there is a Scientologist, so you better watch out"

will not work in the foggy haze of battle. You have cult members on this news group who are equating Bob Minton with Ron Hubbard and who call themselves "critics." If you side with the alleged "critics" and treat Bob Minton as if he were on the same level as the Master of Deception, Ron Hubbard, you will turn into an unknowing, enemy toady. It is intended that way.

This Alternative Charlemagne award is a great idea, and the timing is great, too. It comes after a years-long endeavor by Scientology to frame Bob Minton flopped at the Florida trial as badly as Battlefield Earth. It shows the cult up for what it is. Speaking of showing cults up for what they are, look at a secondary benefit of the award: cultists are attacking something that differentiates people from being animals - appreciation.

Is criticizing the award an attack? No, I've privately received some great arguments against this award, and against awards in general. The arguments are backed up with facts and based on appreciation of values. I've gone on with this anyway because it looks to me like the benefits outweight the disadvantages. One benefit is a public demonstration of operation on a level which nobody can rationally associate with resentment and hatred.

Another benefit is the drawing of the line between irrationality and rationality. Here's an example of irrationality: "Do you still beat your wife? Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to say it that way" is an example of asking a question for the purpose of planting in the listeners' minds that not only may the person addressed have once beat his wife, but that the asker let something slip that he had secret knowledge of. There is no difference between that and asking if the award committee, of which Gerry Armstrong and Ursula Caberta are members, is not a front group for an anti-cult movement similar to what Narconon is for Scientology, then apologizing for having used the wrong wording.

By the way, Scientolgy's OSA is also busy trying to poison the environment for the award in Leipzig, Germany, the site of the award presentation.

Joe Cisar: http://cisar.org/rfs0100.htm Award site: http://alt-charlemagne-award.de Why would Gottfried Helnwein, one of the world's leading Scientologists, lie? See http://members.tripod.com/German_Scn_News/has00.htm