Scientology only supports freedom of speech if the content of the speech
is not critical of, or an attack upon their cult.
In article <63se0u$f20@netaxs.com>, rkeller@netaxs.com says...
>
>[ Article reposted from news.groups ]
>[ Author was RonsAmigo ]
>[ Posted on 6 Nov 1997 08:10:51 GMT ]
>
>Hi,
>
>I need some help, or a point to some help, from a usenet "old-hand."
>
>Am I correct in my assumption that it is of paramount importance
>that a usenet group's name accurately reflects the content and use
>of that particular group?
>
>When such is not the case, say in an alt. group, is there a procedure
>to get the group renamed so that its actual content and use is accurately
>reflected in its name?
>
>A point to a faq or any other relative information would be appreciated.
>
>Thanks,
>Amigo
What this demonstrates is Scientology's total failure at "running
8-C" (control) on Usenet. Scientologists must, must, must control
everything said about them. (Well, at least they *try*!) Don't you
know that it drives Scientology and Scientologists absolutely *nuts*
that netizens are free to express themselves and relate their personal
experiences with Scientology, and the cult does not have control over
what is said about their organization.
You see, the viewpoint of Scientologists is that they have the _only_ workable
"technology", that Scientologists are the _most_ "ethical beings
on the planet", and that anyone who criticizes their cult is a criminal.
The fact that there are _far_ more ex-members than current members
should give the cult a clue that their founder's methods are those of a
madman. If there was true happiness, spiritual enlightenment and
success to be found within Scientology, I am certain that individuals
would stay involved, rather than speak out against the cult.
I want those Scientologists reading this to think about something
your founder said. He said something to the effect that the only
thing Scientology can be upbraided for is "poor results" or "lack
of results" - in other words, for a "failure to deliver what was
promised". Think about that for a moment...
Scientology _only_ supports freedom of speech if the content of the
speech is not critical of, or an attack upon their cult. The cult's
"Creed of Scientology" is a farce. There is no freedom of speech in
Scienoland, and Scientology is horrified that it cannot control the
internet.
The attempt by Helena Kobrin to rmgroup ars, the massive spamming,
the cancellation of articles critical of Scientology, the lawsuits
and their attempts at "handlings entheta" are all total failures on
the part of the cult.
Make no mistake about it Scientology; you are now getting the long
overdue "motivators" you so richly deserve. For your failure to take
responsibility for your organization's lies, betrayals, deceits and
all-around suppressions of so many individuals, you are no getting
the scrutiny you have needed for decades. Face it; your cult *fails
miserably* in delivering what was promised!
May the citizens of the world come to ars and tell their stories
of their involvement in the fascist cult, Scientology. May the myriad
victims of Scientology's scam come forward. May the thousands of
individuals who have had a family member betrayed and conned by this
cult come out to speak up on ars.
I, for one, believe that Scientology's leaders know that their
future days of suppression are numbered. Obviously Scientology despises
the fact that they cannot control ars.
May true freedom of speech reign!
Warrior