GO Dawn

I do feel that Curioser does however bring up one good point; why are we -only- targeting the CCHR? I can understand that they have made their presence clear lately (they picketed something about their using drugs or something to that effect), but Narconon and Crimonon are both dangerous organizations who lure in innocent people with their misleading names (Narconon especially, some people think it’s Narcotics Anonymous), and Applied Scholastics has no educational merit what-so-ever (a study was actually published that demonstrated their methods were inferior to those used in the Public Schools — y’ouch!).
All Scientology front-groups deserve the same amount of critics. Time will show that we are not forgiving…

If you really want to get picky, “tabloid” doesn’t actually mean a publication that reports on celebrity/ entertainment news- it refers to where a newspaper is folded- taboids are half the size of broadsheets, and are usually associated with the lower portions of society, as they were usually less expensive, had a less challenging vocabulary, and were easier to read in close quarters, such as public transportation.

Regardless of whether a newspaper is a tabloid or broadsheet, if a publication prints an inaccuracy, then it is the responsibility of the injured party to prove the publication wrong- and that is why there are so few suits against them. In order to prove a tabloid incorrect, one must then open up a celebrity’s life to the public to prove that the publication has printed a falsehood, something a celebrity is usually loath to do. Newspapers and magazines are in the business of NOT being sued- it would be very irresponsible and lousy business (not to mention short term) practice if publications repeatedly printed outrageous and outlandish lies. Just because you don’t want something to be true doesn’t mean that it isn’t.

What is happening here is not muckracking- where’s the muck? There are quotes from legitimate news gathering organizations, and Dawn’s editorial, her own personal point of view, which in this country (last time I checked) was still something she had a right not only to have, but to voice.

As for Anonymous being involved with Big Pharma- there are many silly accusations I have read on many of the CoS apologist entries here and elsewhere, but this has to take the cake. Think about it for a moment- even though I am not a member of Anon and therefore cannot 100% guarantee this, it would be unrealistic and vastly unbelievable that large multi national conglomerates, worth billions of dollars, and employers of hundreds of thousands of people would be taking orders from nameless, faceless hackers. Do you see how outrageous and unrealistic that notion sounds?

Drugs, whether for malaria or depression, take years to develop, market and pass FDA compliance. Anonymous’ battle with Scientology has been waged for the last couple of months. You do the math. Even if this sounds reasonable to you, how would Big Pharma meet with Anonymous? What good would their association bring?

As for your problems with Dawn’s definitions, here it is from the horse’s mouth- the official Scientology dictionary. You can find it here at http://www.scientology.org/gloss.htm#o

OT - OT: abbreviation for Operating Thetan. See Operating Thetan in this glossary. Operating Thetan: a state of being above Clear, in which the Clear has become refamiliarized with his native capabilities.
MEST - mest: a word coined from the initial letters of matter, energy, space and time, which are the component parts (elements) of the physical universe.
Ack - not in the official CoS dictionary
BT - not in the official CoS dictionary- perhaps because it refers to higher levels that are “protected” by the church.
CC - Celebrity Center
COB RTC - Chairman of the Board for the Religious Technology Center.
CoS - abbreviation for the Church of Scientology
KSW - abbreviation for “Keep Scientology Working”
RD - rundown: a series of related actions in Scientology which culminate in a specific end result. For example, the Drug Rundown consists of several different auditing processes and actions which, done fully and in sequence, result in the freeing of a person from the mental and spiritual effects of drugs.
SP - suppressive person: a person who possesses a distinct set of characteristics and mental attitudes that cause him to suppress other people in his vicinity. This is the person whose behavior is calculated to be disastrous. Also called antisocial personality.
Sec Check - Not in official Scientology dictionary- might put off the punters!
PTS - a person who is in some way connected to and being adversely affected by a suppressive person. Such a person is called a potential trouble source because he can be a lot of trouble to himself and to others. See also suppressive person in this glossary.
Wog - Not in official Scientology dictionary- oddly enough neither is “Raw Meat.”

And before you get your knickers in a twist, Curiouser, there is a citation stating that these terms and definations come from a CoS publication, and therefore is public domain; in other words can be used by anyone who wishes to cite it.

By the way, maybe you could explain something to me. If the CoS is a Church, then why does it have copyright and trademark protection that is so rigorously protected? Why is it the only Church in America to have such protection?

D, you’re doing a great job. Whoever sent you that email was obviously a Scientologist, and you should ignore it. Chances are that you’ll be recieving more like that, but that’s what happens as you head deeper into the rabbit’s hole. You just gotta take it in stride <3

For many of the LEAK (aka LEAF) assignments they have to write their comments or letters, and submit them for approval prior to posting them, THEN they have to report compliance via email.

Good, now I must go adhere to ANON rule #623 and send DAVID a copy of this post.