About the "truce" - alt.religion.scientology

Message from discussion About the "truce"

Alec

More options Dec 19 1997, 3:00 am

Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology

From: "Alec" <a...@flash.net>

Date: 1997/12/19

Subject: Re: About the "truce"

  Reply to author
  |
  Forward
  | Print
  | View thread
  | Show original
  | Report this message
  | Find messages by this author
  

Inducto wrote in message <19971219183101.NAA26...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
>>Why are the Scientologists simultaneously offering a truce? I'm thinking
>>it's a little test, to see if we are all completely unreasonable or if
>>there are some who will listen to "reason". Or perhaps a PR stunt to claim
>>we don't respect Christmas in some Freedom Magazine article.

>Perhaps CoS management wants to try to prove to the staff and public that
>a.r.s. is in fact coordinated; if all the critics stop posting they can
claim
>it as proof that a.r.s. is centrally controlled rather than that its a
group of
>undividuals with a nearly universal sense of goodwill. They may just want
to
>record the bickering of the critics about whether or not to do it (good
reason
>to avoid bickering and rash statements regarding this issue). Still, I
think
>it good for critics to take the moral high ground, whatever the
scientologists
>may try to make of it.

>I think it is also part of their doctrine about control, that if you can
get a
>person or a group to agree to something once, then you have a foothold to
>slowly bring them to heel. But this, though partially valid, can be easily
>enough disproven as applicable in this case.....

>Inducto

Nah... This is about future PR and material for future Dead-agent packs.
If they can show they offered a truce and we rejected, they can seek to show
that we are hostile. Can you imagine who is going to give it a second
thought?

Since OSA's presence here is strictly optional for them, as hecklers, then
no "truce" is relevant. They can simply go back to where they came from and
let us go about the business of exposing their Satanist religion. If the
purpose of a truce is to cease hostilities, one needs to consider that the
hostilities began when OSA began hostilities against this group--within this
group. If they would just refrain, that would amount to the truce they
seek. We don't go into their "churches". They should stay out of ours.

Their offer of a truce implies they are rightful, accepted participants
here. What a move! Their presence here is purely subversive. Offering a
truce in the guise of generosity is clear demonstration of the natural
"1.1-ness" of Scientologists. With guile and deception, they hope to cover
their guile and deception.

My answer is a resounding "NO!". No slack in the war against totalitarian
control. A truce would be our permission for them to proceed in their
planetary coup. Speaking for the future of mankind, I say, The Fuck stops
here!

---Alec

We would all do better to go about our business without responding to their
disruptive efforts.

---

Reply to author Forward