Next Bernie page is about a critic webpage [url=http://bernie.cncfamily.com/irc_intro.htm"What is Scientology?"]What is Scientology?[/url]
The first excerpt is from a bunch of jokers and degraders - QUOTE:
<Tomomi>: hey! can I ask you "scientologists" a question?
if you dont mind of course
<D> sure. But we have to remove your brain first.
don't worry, we'll give you a receipt.
<Zinjifar> It's a squirrel world after all.
This thread makes jokes but has several quite factual statements. I don't see how it establishes any myth other than that <D> and <Zinjifar> are smartasses.
The next section, about Xenu, is taken by Bernie as proof that critics think the Xenu myth is the core. I have already proved above that Bernie is partly right, to CoS, the Xenu myth is a core fact
Bernie pounces on the line that "what we say is 100% true" as if the whole thread wasn't a wisecracking joke. The line that "Hubbard took dope and pulled it out of his ass this is called research" is obviously untrue. These guys are not making depositions in court cases. They are making jokes and throwing out sound bites that are their personal beliefs about CoS. I again state that any critic is both oversimplifying AND understating the truth about CoS. This happens in regular history class, too, which simplifies the incredibly complicated story of Richard III of England. The whole truth about every wrong, from forced abortions to Lisa McPherson, would take ten books to fully explain. On a usenet discussion, people HAVE to simplify the arguments. AND they can't list every wrong. So on each argument, CoS loses a little slack (through simplification) and wins a little slack (through there being too many crimes to easily list).
Bernie has ONE example to prove that at least one Scientologist can post on line, namely Enzo Piccone, here
Yet, if you read Enzo, you'll see he is VERY careful to only criticize CoS in the most vague way. I would be interested in what would happen to Enzo if he criticized an issue that CoS was touchy about.
Bernie feels sorry for poor Scientologists, QUOTE: When they do not fit the low picture critics would like them to be but try to communicate nevertheless, they are accused of being secret agent ("OSA') posters or have one or another hidden motive. The myth of "Scientologists are not allowed here (by COS) " fits at the same time 1) the picture of a totalitarian cult that forces its members away from outside criticism, 2) the justification as to why Scientologists don't usually come in these foums, and 3) dismissal of those who do come and make saillant points 'in spite" of being Scientologists.
In answer to (1):The critics are not saying that CoS doesn't allow any criticism; they are saying that CoS doesn't allow its members to come onto a.r.s. There have been a number of stories of people thrown out of CoS when their a.r.s. activity was discovered. So (1) is a Bernie overstatement.
In answer to (2): Bernie is sooo smug about how Scientologists come here, are appalled, and leave (probably for Freezone). Bernie calls himself an "indie" Scientologist and seems to see himself as a shepherd and wise counselor to ex-Scientologists, advising them to stay away from those mean a.r.s. posters and snarky OCMB critics. Bernie hurriedly shows them carefully selected "mean critic" posts and tut-tuts about how the ex-Scientologists should just rely on nice balanced Bernie for their understanding of CoS. Then Bernie pats himself on the back for having another "ally" in the anti-a.r.s., anti-OCMB camp.
I wish instead of carefully selecting "mean critics" sample, Bernie would decide in advance to pick a week, say November 10-17, 2003, and copy over to his own computer EVERY post made on a.r.s. and on OCMB that week. Then he could analyze it, counting every post where critics act superior to Scientology defenders, AND count every post where Scientology defenders act superior to critics. You'd find that belittling goes two ways on this message board.
Then, Bernie can count every post where critics are polite and non-superior, and where Scientology defenders are polite and non-superior. And then Bernie would show THAT week's worth of posts to new ex-Scientologists, and let them make a decision over that information. Bernie talks about being distorted, but is happy to whittle a.r.s. and OCMB down to a few pages where critics overstate their case in front of a Bernie who mildly talks about a "spiritual page" but has a secret, preachy, hypocritical agenda of gathering material for his website.
You have to look at the overall tone of the message board. A few snarky jokes do not contaminate an entire message board for a decade.
In answer to (3) Bernie should re-examine these "salient points" that Scientology defenders are making. Some of them are conceited and downright insulting. Critics are human and get sore when personally insulted. In addition, some of the points, even though they are "true" for the Scientology defender, are not "true" in the sense of objective reality. The critics do jump on mistakes, and they should. Bernie has so much pity for the misunderstood "moderate critics" (and so little pity for Lisa McPherson
). Why not be grown-ups and stand up to a tough argument? Christine Bailey
Next Bernie gives an example of a "moderate critic" who is jumped on,Christine Bailey
bailey: I have been lurking around here for about a 18 months and I have a question. Do you people ever do anything constructive like inform and educate or do you just like to see who can bitch the loudest and longest?
Lima bean: Tell us your crimes, fucker.
How do you feel about Safe being fucked over by Co$ management? Does your ethics officer know you read this entheta forum? Do the goddamn formula and get the fuck out.
Hartley Patterson: There are thousands of newgroups out there, millions of Web Pages, lots of mailing lists, IRC etc etc. And here you are reading a newsgroup you don't like for 18 months? And after that time all you can do is come out with a silly comment?
Nope. You are a troll most likely, employed by the CoS. What crimes have you comitted? END A.R.S. QUOTE
Now what might have irritated Lima bean and Hartley Patterson enough to insult tender Miss Bailey? Let’s list them.
1. She’s been lurking for about 18 months, and SHE’S asking them if they do anything constructive?
2. She uses the extremely impolite “you people.” Gotcha there, Bailey. QUOTE: it is politically incorrect to hate certain things, like minorities, or even to suggest such emotions by, say, telling ethnic jokes or referring to the NAACP, collectively, as Ross Perot once did, as "you people."
3. She uses the bitch word to summary what “you people” do.
Summary: Bailey is setting a trap to see who will insult her back, preferably with swear words. She is immediately rewarded with one obscene post and then someone who calls here a troll. Bernie is so careful to explain Bailey’s posts in ANOTHER newsgroup as being a member of another religion. How the hell were Lima bean and Harltey Patterson to know about her identity on other newsgroups? If she HAD been 100% lurking, they would have had NO WAY to gauge Bailey’s philosophy except by the insulting post above.
But even Hartley said “You are a troll most likely” meaning that her post was trying to provoke a fight for (1) her own amusement and sense of superiority or (2) to make the a.r.s. community look bad. Hartley qualified his remark by saying "most likely," which seems reasonable to me.
Bernie KNOWS that a favorite line of OSA trolls is "what crimes have you committed?" If Bailey WERE an OSA troll, she might have been one of those annoying people saying that phrase. Lima bean and Hartley were both testing to see if Bailey would reply back something like "YOU'RE the ones with crimes." That would just about cinch it that Bailey was OSA. However, the test didn't work, since Bailey apparently wasn't OSA.
My conclusion is that Bernie just grabbed this thread as an example of critics insulting a counter-critic, without really reading the Bailey’s counter-critic statement to see what taunts it contained.
Overall, I return to my earlier argument. Since a.r.s. cannot stop anybody from changing their nickname and coming back under a new name, anybody can just say an annoying or insulting thing, hoping some critics will reply thoughtlessly, whereupon someone else can insult back, and so. With anonymity, these arguments are just sideshow entertainment to the real job of posting facts. The true identities are simply unverifiable, so you can’t use them to prove all trolls=critics and therefore critics=bigots. Back to the "What is Scientology" webpage
Look at Zinjifar's thoughtful reply to tomomi
<Zinjifar> : no tomomi
hypnotic rondroids yes
but in general well meaning and intelligent people
who got scammed
Hey, sounds pretty kind to me! RPF
The RPF has already been discussed, that Bernie never addressed the troubling situation in Gold. These guys are wrong to claim Clearwater is RPF central. I think they are confusing the Lisa McPherson story with the RPF. With well-heeled public flying in for courses, CoS can't do intense RPF punishment in Clearwater, at least not at the Fort Harrison. But Gold, with that razor wire around it, and people who have not been heard from for years... it is worth talking about. RPF is not a myth; CoS admits to it. Whether the RPF at Gold is a prison camp is a troubling mystery. It's wrong to muzzle conversation about it when lives might be in danger. Back to What is Scientology?
Now the old jokers and degraders say goodbye to the newbie totomi:
<D>: You can have your brain back now.
Then Bernie hops in and asks permission to re-post this conversation. I don't see where he actually got permission from anyone but Tashkent and (reluctantly) Zinjifar. N was adamant about not being quoted. I would like to see the posts where Tomomi, N, and D gave their permission. Otherwise again Bernie is again demonstrating inability to read.
Here Bernie shows no sense of humor or flow of conversation. He ignores <D>'s joke: QUOTE We left out the bit about E-meter nipple clamps. Darn! END QUOTE
The end of this page is the height of mealy-mouth hypocrisy. Bernie labels as "chilling" the above joke-fest Then he says it is "neither my goal nor my interest is to judge who is a "bigot"
Yet here are direct insults ON THIS PAGE by Bernie against critics of Scientology: cultish sinister paranoia and cult phobia sometimes turn out to be an even bigger danger than cults themselves.
AND his website has an entire section devoted to "Bigotry
What this page has done is make me want to meet D and N and Zinjifar. They're like a great comedy team!