On 16 Jun 2003 09:44:47 -0700, [email protected] (pts2) wrote:
> I agree with Ed, BunnyAnn, and others here on many issues for thought.
> Fisrt of all, let me say I think your case deserves a LOT more
> attention than it gets. It has all the ingredients ripe for a network
> made-for-TV movie.
There are more interesting stories than mine. I have discussed doing some of them with various people who have made similar movies before. You can guess the results: any possible gains don't come close to compensating for the certain loses from scientology's attack lawyers.
Scientology has perfected using money to turn the courts into weapons against those who try to expose it. People may not fear scientology itself, but they properly fear the courts--backed up by the full coercive power of the government. The only way out is to leave the US.
Money does not have quite the same power to attack through courts here in Canada, though it does work for defense. Thus law enforcement here is unwilling to "lift the tail of the skunk" because they know it will ruin their budget. In the US everybody who understands what's going on, lawyers, government officials, news people, and even some judges, considers the courts to be worse than useless where scientology is concerned.
It is amazing to hear high level officials hinting what they feel is an appropriate course of action when the courts are no longer able to provide redress.
> However, arguing one's own case becomes fuzzy and seemingly tenuous.
> Those of us who have been direct targets of the cult's DA, Black PR,
> and Fair Game(c)
> practices naturally feel far more zeal than others because the severe
> personal damage and harm often times beyond repair. We fall into a
> trap of assuming the general public knows the destrutuve nature of $cn
> or are familiar with our own severe plights with the cult. Sadly
> that's not the case.
"Incredulity of our data and validity. This is our finest asset and gives us more protection than any other single thing. If certain parties thought we were real we would have infinitely more trouble ... without a public incredulity we never would have gotten as far as we have. And now it's too late to be stopped. The protection was accidental but it serves us very well indeed. Remember that the next time the ignorant scoff." -- L. Ron Hubbard
> From experience, I could only recommend to have correspondence to
> courts, and the media, to come from representatives of yours - not you
Right. And just *who* is going to be such a representative?
> Although what you write is true and accurate, so often
> the B.S. from $cn is sooooo un"friggen"believable, that readership of
> accounts and concerns think they we are just as nutty as the cult.
> Having recently spent 53 days in prison in 2002, and 33 days in jail
> in 2000, I maintain that the compelling issue of $cieno's abuse of the
> legal system still needs to be a MAJOR focus and always on the front
> burner. So I can say you're on the right track for sure, but try to
> get others to tell your story and report to the authorities. Trust me
> when I say that's easier said than done. It's very frustrating I
It happens there are good reasons the letter is written the way it is. Sorry but I can't discuss them here.
However, the point of supporting what I say with documents has resulted in substantial modifications to the text.