e...@address.at.bottom (ef) wrote in article
<ef-0608970822230...@news.portal.ca>:
>In article <340b3443.25469
...@snews.zippo.com>, b
...@arcadis.be (Bernie) wrote:
>> I am glad Diane reacted the way she did.
>ah yes. you would be. gives you some ammo, don't it.
Hardly.
Diane kept for a long time the Bast tapes for her, out of
courtesy. It must not be easy to keep this type of important
information, yet she did. When Rob Clark and Sister Clara
attacked her and Keith Spurgeon in the most vile and ugly manner
there was post after post in an attempt to silence her and
prevent her to bring that up, she did just that, she brought the
whole thing in full light, and she did well. They called for it
and the information of the Bast tapes really belong to this
newsgroup in the same way as any other information about LRH
that are gathered by ex-members, and other means.
She kept the information about Rob's bomb threat for her, I
don't know for how long. I don't know if *I* or anyone else
could keep such a vital piece of information for that long,
watching how this myth went on and on in the newsgroup, the CofS
being repeatedly "proved" criminal because of it. It is only
when Rob repeatedly insulted her, distorted everything, and
repeatedly misrepresented her dealings with the court where she
obtained the documents, after she had asked him to stop doing so
for post after post, that she came up with this information. And
she did well. Not only he certainly called for it, but it
corrected a serious wrong. Do you think it is something "good"
that a false information such as this one is repeatedly
circulated in the newsgroup? Now, frankly, ef, do you find that
right?
Diane spoke against FACTNet for as long as I can remember it.
She kept this particular piece of information for herself,
though. When Dennis challenged her and actually framed her in
the most manipulative and disgusting manner as he did to
challenge her to reveal this very information, then, yes, I
think that she did well to go ahead and answer the precise
questions he put to her, because that was a clear setup, a clear
manipulative tactic, something that you seem to disregard
completely, ef. *He* certainly has an important part of
responsibility in that, because he *knew* the answer, and he
deliberately pushed Diane's buttons, which he is certainly the
best placed to know. It's too easy to forget the whole context
and just accuse Diane of "breaking confidence" without any
reason.
Diane *proved* that it is not what she does unless she is pushed
to it, she *proved* that she can backup her claim and argue
logically and fairly. How many amongst the dozens claims she
did, did she not substantiate, ef? Yet, nothing of that is
acknowledged. She is putting us the same hard questions she put
the scieno, and for that alone she is a bitch, right? We applaud
when she does it to the CofS, and cry faul and "malevolence"
when we have to face the same questions. How dishonest! How
utterly dishonest. Now how about indulging in deliberate
manipulation, as Dennis did? I have hardly words for it.
As for Dennis, no one can accuse me of telling him for what he
is *now*, because I am not saying anything else than what I said
a few weeks/months ago, when I became aware of his manipulative
and abusive ways. I made posts after posts about that, nothing
new. If anything, he just proved once again the type of
manipulation he engage into. Diane confronted him with his own
words about involuntary conservatorship, something that
supposedly he is not supporting, and since then he didn't stop
trying to pull Diane in his embroiled, messed up, and twisted
state of mind.
Bernie
