Hello, let me just write a word to you Andreas:

Although it might be hard to see it from this side in this very situation, but look at it from the point of view how important this site is - and how important you are in exposing the con!

Otherwise they wouldn't try to libel you like that. Keep up the work and keep up the site. You are important to the community which gathered here!

James

Andreas,
Great response to each line there.

Two lines in their letter stuck out at me



So according to this line religious hate and copyright infringment are equal?




This is really telling in their mind set. The Church, the only one that matters, the only one that is a real religion. Removing the 'the' and plurilizing 'Churchs' would match their earlier statements about you being against all religions.

Here is a question to ask what other religions does the RFW help to protect?

Great work, I am glad that you have brought us together.

Atheist

Andreas, just logging in anew to give you support, as small as it may be, in your ongoing efforts against the cult.

And I concur, they're never going to agree, there's just far too much history between them from what I've read.

That said, from a casual reader's point of view, I think it would be a improvement if you could again restrict Lerma's self-aggrandizing cutting and pasting, especially into threads such as this which are about YOU and www.xenu.net.

That's one of the few failings of this board - too much license given in terms of 'emoticon' type graphics - firing-cannons, puerile variations of smileys. etc, etc.

I look forward to your next generation of software - a kill-filter for embedded graphics and long-winded diatribes !

Chad the cad,
Nice to hear the cult's spin on things.
Sorry but Arnie is a legimate critic and you are?

Ltricha1, you're the classic example of why OCMB has never achieved the status that Andreas deserves for his efforts.

A mild criticism of Arnie's 'approach' and all you can do is pathetically knee-jerk with '..nice to hear the cult's spin..'

All you achieve is to drag the whole board down in the public's perception.

Your comment was as weak-minded as any slavish cult dolt's would be.

Andreas,

I wouldn't sue them...Here's why.

It's illogical to defend yourself against lies. To take action gives it credibility.

As an employer, I know my employees. Which ones are ethical, creative and have a good or excellent job performance. I take it you have worked for this employer for some time and they know you.

I would also take note of those employees that initiate litigation. An employer has a heightened awareness for employees who go chasing after people in court. I know this isn't fair but it's a reality. They take mental note of it because they are on guard for litigation against themselves. There is a difference of somebody being involved in a hit-and-run involving bodily harm and seeking damages in court and someone involved in a hit-and-run accident to their EGO. Also is this litigation going to affect your job performance by increasing your level of exasperation, grief and pre-occupying your time. Your employer would consider this a personal problem and doesn't concern them. It would not effect your employment unless you let it.

The Fear of what if....and pursuing twits in court for libel.
What if this hurts my reputation, job, standing in the community, etc. Get pass the what ifs.
It didn't hurt anything but possibly your ego. You are still very much respected by many people, and evidently feared by scientology. (Don't let that go to your head...hehe).

So now the peanut brain scientologist reports back to his commander.
Did your little letter to Andreas employer have any effect?
No...Andreas seems unshakable and a well respected employee. OR Yes he took the bait and we get to harass him in court.

If the fear starts to gnaw at you, take out Tory's letter and read it to yourself. Its filled with compassion and truth.

Lwrong Chad the cad.
You are suggesting that certain posters be censored. Censorship is the tool of a toltarian regime.

Andreas, bless his soul, is a defender of free speech.

Second you adhomem attack on a very successful critic, arnie, is an excellent example of a cult tactic.

I am captain obvious and just serve to point it out.

As to this bullshit statement...

When the US newspapers need a source for information on $cientology they site OC.
When Certain critics and TV news programs aire information on $cientology they site www.XENU.net.

XENU is probably the best known source for critical information on the cult of $cientology. So you are wrong.

Okay, you're drunk.. or something similar.

www.xenu.net is a different thing from ocmb.xenu.net

www.xenu.net is Andreas's primary creation and which he has control over, whereas ocmb.xenu.net is what he has created and left open to be abused, and IMHO, is abused by such as you and Arnie. And even by me !

Out of respect for Andreas, I withdraw from any further discussion with you, until you demonstrate a level of logical thought that is appropriate for the high purpose of this board.

I'll leave it at this : Andreas is who Arnie wants to be but cant, so he leaches on OCMB by cutting and pasting copious amounts of oft-published texts and worse, irrelevant band-width grabbing graphics. I think it would be far better for OCMB if he didn't.

Of course Andreas would never agree, he's far too nice a guy for that

Although I seem to recall him kicking Arnie of OCMB for exactly this reason ...mmmm ?

Arnie Lerma wrote:

~~Quote~~

"In exchange for trying to protect andreas from your bad advice I get a dose of tigger's de-popularization.

Dear Tigger,

I have made good faith efforts to settle our differences,
From: lermanet_com
To: tigger
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 2:25 pm
Subject: let chat
whats yer fone number lets chat
arnie
_________________
Arnaldo Lerma
Lermanet.com Exposing the CON
From: lermanet_com
To: tigger
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 2:25 pm
Subject: let chat
whats yer fone number lets chat
arnie
oh 703 241 1498
ive got an hour to kill"


Anything you have to say to me can be posted on OCMB. You've had no reluctance in postomg all kinds of bullshit about me. Or Patricia Greenway. Or Ken Dandar. Why don't you apologize to them, Lisa's family, Leo J. Ryan Foundation, Dan Leipold, Larry Wollershiem, and other critics for what you, Minton and Brooks tried to do?

So Arnie, are you claiming you DON'T CCP those long and/or redundant posts, rants, whatever?

Your claim that you're never made up facts has been proven to be false.



Tigger

P.S. And take those made up SCN RFW type webpages off the internet.

Dear 'chad', thank you for the opportunity to further teach ocmb's readers.




See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Ad hominem as logical fallacy

"A (fallacious) ad hominem argument has the basic form:

1. A makes claim B;
2. there is something objectionable about A,
3. therefore claim B is false."

this is what religious freedom watch uses, Logical Fallacy.. Ad Hominem. This is also what chad used. chad should study Logical Fallacy.. It is a subject I find very usedful deprogramming Scientologists. Thus is worth repeating, until enough people realize the importance of Logical Fallacy TECH.. which is where Hubbard stole the "DATA SERIES" in hugely abbreviated form.. and after all Hubbard did say, always goto source...

"An ad hominem fallacy consists of asserting that someone's argument is wrong and/or they are wrong to argue at all purely because of something discreditable/not-authoritative about the person or those persons cited by them rather than addressing the soundness of the argument itself. The implication is that the person's argument and/or ability to argue correctly lacks authority. Merely insulting another person in the middle of otherwise rational discourse does not necessarily constitute an ad hominem fallacy. It must be clear that the purpose of the characterization is to discredit the person offering the argument, and, specifically, to invite others to discount his arguments. "

Poisoning the well
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_well

Poisoning the well is a pre-emptive logical fallacy where adverse information about someone is presented to an audience, with the intention of discrediting everything he is about to say.

This sort of reasoning involves trying to discredit what a person might later claim by presenting unfavorable information (be it true or false) about the person. This "argument" has the following form:

1. Unfavorable information (be it true or false) about person A is presented. 2. Therefore any claims person A makes will be false.

The origin of the phrase comes from the belief in medieval times that outbreaks of bubonic plague were caused by Jews poisoning the water supply. Suggesting that someone was not to be trusted after accusing them of the unrelated crime of poisoning the water was effective rhetoric, but bad logic.

Examples:
Before you listen to my opponent,
may I remind you that he has been in jail.
Don't listen to what he says, he's a lawyer.

Poisoning the well is a special case of argumentum ad hominem."

This is also what the Scientology Dead Agent pages use.

And:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilt_by_association

Association fallacy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
(Redirected from Guilt by association)

An association fallacy is a type of logical fallacy which asserts that qualities of one are inherently qualities of another, merely by association. The two types are sometimes referred to as "guilt by association" and "honor by association." Association fallacies are a special case of red herring, and are often based in an appeal to emotion.

Guilt by association, also known as the "bad company fallacy" or the "company that you keep fallacy," is the logical fallacy of claiming that something must be false because of the people or organizations who support it. Some examples are:

* Atheism must be wrong — Pol Pot and Stalin were atheists, and just look at them.
* Osama bin Laden is a Muslim, so Islam is an evil religion.
* A few Catholic priests have molested children, so Catholicism is evil.
* Anti-war activists has made statements critical of Israel. Neo-nazis have made similar statements. Therefore, opposing the war is equivalent to supporting Nazism

The logical inverse of "guilt by association" is honor by association, where one claims that someone or something must be reputable because of the people or organisations who are related to it, or otherwise support it. For example:

* Alice is a lawyer, and Alice thinks highly of Bob. Therefore, Bob must know the law.
* Aaron will make a good race car driver, because his father was a good race car driver.

For that reason above, i felt it necessary to share the truth with Andreas, as a contrast to Scientology's lies. "

If my replies appear to you to be self aggrandizement, then perhaps the source of that fault lies elsewhere than with the person upon whome you projected the accusation..





This is making a distinction without a difference



Now isnt it interesting that when I defend my views, after being attacked, made less of is the scientological programming term, by stating how things appear to me, then I am engaged in "self aggrandizement"




oh cool he's done...or at least says he is done...

wait, no he isnt, was he lying above? is has this entire posting as much credibility as the RFW pages that were sent to Andreas employer?



leaches, cutting and pasting, copious.. irrelevant..bandidth grabbing..


Nice array of words there, did you write this yourself or did you take it off the the latest dispatches from osa int? and 'wants to be' implies that I am somewhow uncomfortable inside my own identity.. I **really** think you should read more about me on Lermanet.com Exposing the CON



I do believe the american slang term for this is called brown-nosing, he must want something that he feels he does not deserve..




The other thing Id like to point out, is that $cientology always accuses it's enemies of their own despicable acts..

Thank you for the opportunity to give a lesson by your example of Fallacious Argument...

Sincerely

Arnie Lerma
6045 N 26th Rd
Arlington VA 22207
703 241 1498

Why does all threads where a very specific group of people post almost always get off topic? Shouldn't they be more concerned of giving a better impression of themselves?

It's not one, you are a group. Seems like I should start banning accounts again, is that what you want? I know somone who wants that.

Well....to get this thread back on topic...

Shy David Rides to Rescue Andreas

The NCHRA Censures Scientology Inc.'s Human Rights Abuse in Norway

Please note that tigger has learned how to do the links so as to stop being "annoying".

RE: Suing COS

Pitbull may be right.....but all employers are not the same. What does your company think about what you should do, if anything?

The only thing that is certain is that as long as COS considers you a threat (an effective critic) they will take every opportunity (or mock one up) to harass and threaten you.

Best Wishes,

Tigger

We just have to stay focused on our task: Keeping Scientology busy! (and not just eachother).

LOL....I agree with that....Keeping SCN busy and *exposed* The more SCN does, the more its true nature gets exposed.

I'll try to do better.....but sometimes it's so darn hard. Tongue biting can really h u r t.

Tigger