Google Groups Home
Help | Sign in
Message from discussion COS's "Original Overt"?
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
Paper Tiger  
View profile
 More options Oct 26 1997, 2:00 am
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
From: Paper Tiger <paperti...@nym.alias.net>
Date: 1997/10/26
Subject: Re: COS's "Original Overt"?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In Message-ID: <19971026101601.FAA21...@ladder02.news.aol.com>,

wonderf...@aol.com (WONDERFULR) wrote:
>>Hubbard presented that for one to be suppressed by another he must have
>>first committed an overt against the suppressor.

>>COS, I ask you...  What was your original overt against us?

>>David Alexander

>Missing your withholds.   Making you wonder if we had found out about you.  It
> was the uncertainity of if we had,  that got you started.   Your own
> abberations have kept it going.

  This is one of my favorite parts of the Scientology mindset.

  Translated roughly into English, what Russ is saying is that we
  criticize Scientology because of evil things that WE'VE done and
  we're afraid that Scientology (with it's superior "tech") has found
  out about.  Russ goes on to say that our being insane ("abberated",
  lacking Scientology processing - it's the same thing) keeps this
  cycle going.

  Is that a HOOT or what?

  This idea originated with L. Ron Hubbard, of course.  L. Ron said
  that the ONLY reason anyone criticizes Scientology is because
  they're a criminal.  Not because of anything IT'S done, no, that
  couldn't be it...

  If anyone complains about the COS gleefully litigating people into
  bankruptcy, shielding a child molester or neglecting a poor
  troubled woman to death in the home of 100% standard tech, it's
  simply because they're a criminal.  No, really.

  While you're here, Russ, would you mind answering a question?  L.
  Ron says that thoughts have actual physical weight!  No kidding, he
  says that by actual measuements somebody lost 30 pounds by blowing a
  troubling engram.  Is this true?  I could stand to lose a couple
  weighty engrams myself, but I gotta say this sounds like complete
  crap.  No doubt this is because of some terrible crime I've
  committed, though, right?

  ** Paper Tiger (SP3, KBM, LFDoX)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBNFNDRoCmc8kif9MJAQGuBwP9EUdZ7F3Od4t0Yjs2pVisIU+wW4PYxJ6d
3VRH+fLKX5n/6aXJqGFn+Gvjq4pWwSntTc47WRE955z5jr31ryUX0fDFbc289vEm
ETysDEv2a3z80/W2y9fi4gSkg3Y83FEEbsQQ8lMQz1I7+ZgeH5jHMApwYEPGKV9U
FZP3G1Q1I0w=
=Hqvi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


    Reply to author    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.

Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2008 Google