Re: That OT8 file, again

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



WONDERFULR (wonderfulr@aol.com) wrote:
> Erlich writes:

> Erlich writes:

> >Huh ?! Did I miss a post ? And how could Arnie check this 1984 when

> >Huh ?! Did I miss a post ? And how could Arnie check this 1984 when
> >this was introduced much later, I assume at the first Fishman trial ?

> >this was introduced much later, I assume at the first Fishman trial ?
> >

> >
> >Tilman

> >Tilman

>    >>> Yea, give us the details.  You should keep in mind that this 

>    >>> Yea, give us the details.  You should keep in mind that this 
>     was not one of the documents claimed by the scienos in the raid.<<<

>     was not one of the documents claimed by the scienos in the raid.<<<



> Isn't it interesting that Dennis - the expert - needed some confirmation

> Isn't it interesting that Dennis - the expert - needed some confirmation
> from Mayo to have an idea if it was real - or not.  And still isn't "quite

> from Mayo to have an idea if it was real - or not.  And still isn't "quite
> sure".  It seems, at one time he thought the "OT 8" materials to be legit.

> sure".  It seems, at one time he thought the "OT 8" materials to be legit.

No. What is interesting is that, even though he's in a position where
he could probably have covered up any previous mistake and got on
with it since plenty of people would be quite prepared to take his
word on it, he has admitted that he was wrong and corrected himself.


This is a trait which, in the real world, serves to enhance the
reputation of someone who does it, since we can be more confident
that the information he is giving us is correct, for several reasons:
1. because, since he appears to want to be honest, instead of
impressing everyone with his encyclopaedic knowledge, he is not going
to try and bullshit us; 2. we can be confident that, if he does find
out he's got something wrong, he's going to correct himself.


These things endear him to us, both as a reliable source and as an
honourable human being. That is one reason why those individuals who
spout on about how $cientology is the only way, infallible, the
Truth, etc etc, are not endearing: because we know this not to be
true, they know we know this, and yet persist in peddling the lies.


> They arre total crap.  Anyone who really knew Scientology would know it at

> They arre total crap.  Anyone who really knew Scientology would know it at
> once.

> once.

How so? The OTVIII materials are not generally available to anyone


> But Dennis - like many of the rest here - is an "expert".

> But Dennis - like many of the rest here - is an "expert".

> It is amusing to see the level of certainty displayed here.  People who

> It is amusing to see the level of certainty displayed here.  People who
> never studied the subject and those who did not really understand it when

> never studied the subject and those who did not really understand it when
> they did.

> they did.

I suspect that this applies to a lot of $cientologists, too, but they
would never dare say "The emperor has no clothes" for fear of being
accused of being out-ethics or sent to RPF.


> Russell Shaw

> Russell Shaw
>     

>     

Steve


- --
   Send cheques ($, £, you name it) labelled DENNIS ERLICH DEFENCE FUND to
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
stevea@ca|K| Carla Oakley/Katie Walsh, MORRISON &       | "Piece Of Blue Sky"
stlsys.de|o| FOERSTER, 345 California St, San Francisco | by Jon Atack: call
mon.co.uk|X| CA 94104-2675  Tel (415) 677-7700          | +44 (0)1342 316129


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQBVAgUBL9BxrfsT8zz+lqiRAQHIfAH/QFClJrQ/0IOrYKZmRBCUDu+ZgE+iy0ub zM0yG0qGRk+9dQZT0yMis3G5+kTYlIUvFSoM0twaDroX8VqZNYQ1OQ== =56+2

-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----