Scientology, and the war against it.

[Spacey]

looks like someone got the gag order to take the site down

that is bull garbage....

it's ok for reporters to report certain activity to the public and not this? surely an educated public is an informed public, and educating the public about the many views toward scientology is in the world's best interest..

If it were me I would have gone to court with those 'buggers'...

[semper]

I dont think we are brainwashed by our dependance on machine, I just think we are dependant on our machines because we have never known any better.

I have always had a fridge.

I have never been a situation where there are no fridges and we had to made do without them.

I have always had an oven.

I have never needed to create my own fire and start make-shift roasts in soil.

It's not about being brainwashed by our machines, I think its more the fact that technology is everywhere, and when the power goes out, we don't know what to do with ourselves, because its such a part of our lives now that we haven't learned to adjust to it not being there.

Brainwash.

1. Intensive, forcible indoctrination, usually political or religious, aimed at destroying a person's basic convictions and attitudes and replacing them with an alternative set of fixed beliefs.
2. The application of a concentrated means of persuasion, such as an advertising campaign or repeated suggestion, in order to develop a specific belief or motivation.

Where do I begin? We have used by dates on food, they are not needed, most things can last long past their used by date as I have found on many an occasion. We can communicate by letter..or by natural interaction..but yet so many use phones and planes. The ease of technology, and the dependency that has evolved with its advancement IS brainwashing, by definition. It has destroyed the basic attitudes of many people. Look at the invention of alcohol. How many people believe it is necessary to have alcohol to enhance enjoyment, or to give them the ability to alter their attitude and act out of turn. Im not saying everyone is like that..but I am saying MOST people are like that...whats funny is that by thinking like this..after joining scientology...the members have in turn been brainwashed...thereby..most definately causing a conflict of interest.

You're a little off there Semper. Brainwashing is more to do with recoding core values and processes. I'd hardly call Used-by-Dates the vanguard of doom. Rather a preventative measure. Not to save us, oh no. I'm a cynic after all, it's to save law suits so we can't sue if you fall ill or die from ingesting stale merchandise.

And with technology, it's not brainwashing, we don't believe that we must have a mobile. We're just aware of the ease it provides. It's more a oneupmanship's dependency then brainwashing. You can hardly call a technological evolution that has formed to provide such accessibility grounds for persuasive mind alteration.

Alexander Graham Bell or Thomas Edison And many others created out of a want to make life easier. I'm sure there wasn't a widespread media blitz back then to get the light bulb into the house when it was freshly invented (Due mainly to the lack of TVs no doubt...). People just recognized the promise that such an invention would hold and chose to take it onboard. And I can tell you that the first light bulb was no Sovereign, there was no indoctrination.

But to each his own, if you believe that going out and buying a battery is proof that we have had our core beliefs crushed by technology then the best of luck to you. The fact that I can let it slide until it's convenient for me to grab some more at my leisure is proof enough to me that I have will over those evil little energy holders.



Oh and Anon FTW! Fresh Prince of Bell Air!

shakes head. No old boy you clearly dont understand what I said. I said that in the past the belief the values, attitudes were formed, were made without technology, they existed in certain ways because there was NO technology, now with technology ever evolving ever taking more roles in our lives our attitudes have been re-made, because of it. Where as a hundred years ago people were quite happy to say it would kill you if you went more then 20mph, now people have broken the sound barrier, its not an amazing. Where as say thirty years ago, america and briton were very different places to each other, they still are different but the introduction of similar technologies has caused globilisation destroying the older attitued the british had and melding it with that of america's and visa-versa.

Another example is..how many people from their teens' change to mimic personalities they see on television. Yes it can be called growing up..but previous attitudes, previous convictions are destroyed and changed. An example is I have a friend, never used want to go the gym, never really cared about that stuff. My friend has seen the new 'healthy body' culture, it has been shoved in their faces for the past alotment of years, now they want to go to the gym, be stronger, change themselves. There is no real reason they give me other then that. That latter example is actually fictional but its based on a truer story, one that would not have come about without the effect of technology, the ease, or the weak mindedness from day to day easy living technology has given us being affected by society.

The sell by date was a minor example. Most people wont touch food if its past the sell by date, because the allow the technology to dictate, and destroy convictions that would have been in place, and were in place when we were young. How many people on this forum when they were little ever ate something that would have been out of date by a sell by date, but it was ok, how many people still ignore a sell by date and go off taste or smell? Very few..i'll bet.

No people are brainwashed by technology, not by the extreme methods that the scientologist's claim, but rather by the effects technology allows to occur. People all have the same convictions and attitudes these days, few people actually feel or think for themselves I have found in all the hundreds if not thousands of people I have met in my life, they are all just one clone of another. To scared or weak minded to ever be different making them uncaring about anything but family and themselves, because as long as they are similar to something in society they will fit right in. Ergo they need not care..merely act...and what do we use to act technology.

Its very circular, and would take a few times to read through to follow my logic properly, but I at least am 100% behind what I said. The Individual dies more and more every day. Soon people will just be person.

[Apadamek]

You know whats sadder is that so many big hollywood stars have fallen into the stupid trap on this one.

Here is a list of Scientology morons:

This is a religion?

Maybe we should all make up our own version of what we think would have been a cool way for the earth to have started up, and see who has the best, most original ideas. The winner gets a prize.

Well aren't you a conceited dog.

Well aren't you an abrasive bigot? Last time I remember you declaring USA's supremacy based upon it's GDP with the wealthy American signature and you're using the word conceited? Better safeguard your glass house.

Ding ding ding, at least i declared its supremacy through a reasonable argument, its GDP was the largest therefor the best, Shame Nuto didn't call them morons and prove this fact through any legitimate means, just that their idea's didn't seem to coincide with her conceited ways.

As for my "Wealthy American" signature, what of it? i would gladly support Nuto to put up a "self centered egotistical **Filtered**" signature.

[The Deity]

You know whats sadder is that so many big hollywood stars have fallen into the stupid trap on this one.

Here is a list of Scientology morons:

This is a religion?

Maybe we should all make up our own version of what we think would have been a cool way for the earth to have started up, and see who has the best, most original ideas. The winner gets a prize.

Well aren't you a conceited dog.

Well aren't you an abrasive bigot? Last time I remember you declaring USA's supremacy based upon it's GDP with the wealthy American signature and you're using the word conceited? Better safeguard your glass house.

Ding ding ding, at least i declared its supremacy through a reasonable argument, its GDP was the largest therefor the best, Shame Nuto didn't call them morons and prove this fact through any legitimate means, just that their idea's didn't seem to coincide with her conceited ways.

As for my "Wealthy American" signature, what of it? i would gladly support Nuto to put up a "self centered egotistical nightwalker" signature.

Largest therefore the best? That's a reasonable argument? Still basing everything on the quintessential male game it seems.

And you need to prove Scientology wrong? Why? It's common knowledge. There is no need to inform people of what they already know. You already sided with Anonymous, the only reason you have taken up the flag for Scientology is just to argue with Nuto. Way to stand by your convictions.

And conceited again? Nuto is hardly waging a campaign for her own beliefs here, which would constitute being conceited, rather it's cynical. Different C-word, so many floating about. Is everyone else here that disagrees with Scientology being conceited? You included? If so, nice self burn there.

As for the last comment, that Wealthy American/Mercedes Owner sig was an actual avatar for conceited folk. Over belief in one's own abilities, which given your age aren't even your own. Perhaps it should have been "Son of a wealthy American" or "Genetic Lottery Winner".

And we weren't the ones slurring off at you but you saw fit to throw mud. But I'll play. Let's have a look shall we? Self-centered and egotistical are basically synonymous with one another. So you repeated yourself, akin to calling someone a short midget or a fat whale.

And what made me laugh was the boastful aspect of being egotistical, you're the poster child for it. You'd wanna hope your glass house is made of plexi.

[Apadamek]

You know whats sadder is that so many big hollywood stars have fallen into the stupid trap on this one.

Here is a list of Scientology morons:

This is a religion?

Maybe we should all make up our own version of what we think would have been a cool way for the earth to have started up, and see who has the best, most original ideas. The winner gets a prize.

Well aren't you a conceited dog.

Well aren't you an abrasive bigot? Last time I remember you declaring USA's supremacy based upon it's GDP with the wealthy American signature and you're using the word conceited? Better safeguard your glass house.

Ding ding ding, at least i declared its supremacy through a reasonable argument, its GDP was the largest therefor the best, Shame Nuto didn't call them morons and prove this fact through any legitimate means, just that their idea's didn't seem to coincide with her conceited ways.

As for my "Wealthy American" signature, what of it? i would gladly support Nuto to put up a "self centered egotistical nightwalker" signature.

Largest therefore the best? That's a reasonable argument? Still basing everything on the quintessential male game it seems.Just like you are by joining this little thread to defend your girlfriend

And you need to prove Scientology wrong? Why? It's common knowledge. There is no need to inform people of what they already know. You already sided with Anonymous, the only reason you have taken up the flag for Scientology is just to argue with Nuto. Way to stand by your convictions.Look at the post oh learned advesary i said i knew about it, never said i supported that, i also knew about the holocaust which of course means i sided with hitler.

And conceited again? Nuto is hardly waging a campaign for her own beliefs here, which would constitute being conceited, rather it's cynical. Different C-word, so many floating about. Is everyone else here that disagrees with Scientology being conceited? You included? If so, nice self burn there.Like i said i never said anything about disagreeing or agreeing with Scientology, perhaps you'd understand i meant that it was conceited of her to call anyone who believed differently morons.

As for the last comment, that Wealthy American/Mercedes Owner sig was an actual avatar for conceited folk. Over belief in one's own abilities, which given your age aren't even your own. Perhaps it should have been "Son of a wealthy American" or "Genetic Lottery Winner".Good idea

And we weren't the ones slurring off at you but you saw fit to throw mud. Good point, i'll be sure the next time i see someone verbally bashing another for no reason other then he/she doesn't agree with their opinion i'll say "good for you! well done"

And what made me laugh was the boastfully aspect of being egotistical, you're the poster child for it. You'd wanna hope your glass house is made of plexi.

Boastfully aspect? that makes absolutely no sense. My responses are in bold, thought i should tell you seeing as you've been unable to read my other posts

Perhaps it was a little harsh to call her a conceited **Filtered**, but lets be fair here like i said she started "Throwing Mud" as you put it when she felt it fun to go ahead and attack scientology with not even an argument to back up her statements. As for the whole self-centered egotistical thing, good point...will have to remember to stop doing that.

You've always been a reasonable person Deity, how the hell does Nuto attacking some religion just because she feels their stupid work out into a rational opinion?

[The Deity]

You know whats sadder is that so many big hollywood stars have fallen into the stupid trap on this one.

Here is a list of Scientology morons:

This is a religion?

Maybe we should all make up our own version of what we think would have been a cool way for the earth to have started up, and see who has the best, most original ideas. The winner gets a prize.

Well aren't you a conceited dog.

Well aren't you an abrasive bigot? Last time I remember you declaring USA's supremacy based upon it's GDP with the wealthy American signature and you're using the word conceited? Better safeguard your glass house.

Ding ding ding, at least i declared its supremacy through a reasonable argument, its GDP was the largest therefor the best, Shame Nuto didn't call them morons and prove this fact through any legitimate means, just that their idea's didn't seem to coincide with her conceited ways.

As for my "Wealthy American" signature, what of it? i would gladly support Nuto to put up a "self centered egotistical nightwalker" signature.

Largest therefore the best? That's a reasonable argument? Still basing everything on the quintessential male game it seems.

Just like you are by joining this little thread to defend your girlfriend

You either didn't read it correctly or you are unaware of what the term means. And marvelous comeback, "Just like you" really takes me back.
As for your reasonable argument, you call jumping into this with a one line insult acceptable after your alleged ability to thoughtfully argue your case?

And you need to prove Scientology wrong? Why? It's common knowledge. There is no need to inform people of what they already know. You already sided with Anonymous, the only reason you have taken up the flag for Scientology is just to argue with Nuto. Way to stand by your convictions.

Look at the post oh learned advesary i said i knew about it, never said i supported that, i also knew about the holocaust which of course means i sided with Ozzy Osborne.

It's either one or the other with Scientology, you either agree or disagree. As you didn't come out with something along the lines of "Scientology has the word Science in it! It has to be correct you idiots!" then one can infer that you are against. As for your analogy, that has got to be one of the worst yet. You knew about the holocaust and thus support it? At least it's better then denying it ever happened. There is some hope yet. Nice attempt at shock factor though, it has some merit.

And conceited again? Nuto is hardly waging a campaign for her own beliefs here, which would constitute being conceited, rather it's cynical. Different C-word, so many floating about. Is everyone else here that disagrees with Scientology being conceited? You included? If so, nice self burn there.

Like i said i never said anything about disagreeing or agreeing with Scientology, perhaps you'd understand i meant that it was conceited of her to call anyone who believed differently morons.

And by extension anyone else who doesn't believe in it? When a person thinks that once they reach level 7, go out on a special boat, have some ceremony and then they can converse with rocks, I can call them a moron. Call me opinionated all you wish but I think the proof is self evident. You don't have to debate for the side of common knowledge. I don't have to spend hours arguing that the sun will come up tomorrow, nor should I.
And as per the Man for all Seasons, silence constitutes a yes. If you kept your views to yourself while the rest of us were bagging Scientology then popular vote states that you have sided with us.
What's wrong? Afraid to take a side? Or do you have one and after seeing the support for the other are too ashamed to barrack for your own?

As for the last comment, that Wealthy American/Mercedes Owner sig was an actual avatar for conceited folk. Over belief in one's own abilities, which given your age aren't even your own. Perhaps it should have been "Son of a wealthy American" or "Genetic Lottery Winner".

Good idea

Thank you

And we weren't the ones slurring off at you but you saw fit to throw mud.

Good point, i'll be sure the next time i see someone verbally bashing another for no reason other then he/she doesn't agree with their opinion i'll say "good for you! well done"

Again, poor attempt at taking it out of context. There was a list of people presented who believe that volcanoes explode to release the evil spirits of long dead aliens, the history of which was created by a Science Fiction writer and we called them morons.
If only you had actually argued like you pride yourself for doing instead of dropping a one liner. Out of the two, at least Nuto's gave some information.

And what made me laugh was the boastfully aspect of being egotistical, you're the poster child for it. You'd wanna hope your glass house is made of plexi.

Boastfully aspect? that makes absolutely no sense. My responses are in bold, thought i should tell you seeing as you've been unable to read my other posts

You couldn't discern that boastfully was meant to be boastful? Wow... Not much hope for you is there?

Perhaps it was a little harsh to call her a conceited dog, but lets be fair here like i said she started "Throwing Mud" as you put it when she felt it fun to go ahead and attack scientology with not even an argument to back up her statements. As for the whole self-centered egotistical thing, good point...will have to remember to stop doing that.

Everyone else had, we all applauded Anonymous' actions. They are already condemned, all that was provided was a list of the guilty. So yes, it was pathetic of you.

You've always been a reasonable person Deity, how the hell does Nuto attacking some religion just because she feels their stupid work out into a rational opinion?

Perhaps if I actually recognized it as a religion? Mormons have a set of 24 carat gold 10 commandants that some farmer found but never showed anyone. Sure, they're harmless enough. Scientology is just the next step up the idiocy ladder. Fair enough we were seeded by aliens, that has merit but all the other crap that goes with it? Honestly, their founding father is a Sci-Fi novelist. Next JK Rowling will claim that Harry Potter is real and that magic exists in the form portrayed in her novels. That's not stupid?

And just to finish it, heres a nice BL rant. Can't find it on You Tube as Scientolgoy has had it removed but here it is here. http://www.scientomogy.com/boston_legal_scientology.php

Enjoy.

[The Deity]

Well aren't you an abrasive bigot? Last time I remember you declaring USA's supremacy based upon it's GDP with the wealthy American signature and you're using the word conceited? Better safeguard your glass house.

Well aren't the foolish little hypocrite?

You should be a bit more concerned about the logs in your eyes, then Appy's glass house.

One could say the same, involving yourself in other's quarrels. Aren't you the one to quell arguments rather then start them? Or are you just taking all American comments to heart. Feeling a little xenophobic? Funny the timing of this posts appearance in this thread no? Birds of a feather I guess.
Oh and for the record, Appy's insults as well as my own seemed to have merit. You don't seem to bring much to the band wagon.

[The Deity]

Well aren't you an abrasive bigot? Last time I remember you declaring USA's supremacy based upon it's GDP with the wealthy American signature and you're using the word conceited? Better safeguard your glass house.

Well aren't the foolish little hypocrite?

You should be a bit more concerned about the logs in your eyes, then Appy's glass house.

One could say the same, involving yourself in other's quarrels. Aren't you the one to quell arguments rather then start them? Or are you just taking all American comments to heart. Feeling a little xenophobic? Funny the timing of this posts appearance in this thread no? Birds of a feather I guess.
Oh and for the record, Appy's insults as well as my own seemed to have merit. You don't seem to bring much to the band wagon.

Lest we forget your baseless insult against Alabama, then my remark is full of merit.

Are you blind or just unsure of the words you are typing? Baseless? I was informed by an American who is living in Alabama of his opinions of the literacy. I think if you take the time to look up the definition of baseless you'll find that you are far from correct.

Then there's the fact you jumped on me for "involving myself in other's arguments". Which is exactly what you did in the post I quoted, thus my statement about you being a hypocrite is not only valid, but proven, thanks.

Are you romantically involved with Appy? If not then you are less involved in the argument then I and thus you interjected yourself. A out of the blue slur against my girlfriend is in my mind, open justification for my involvement. And you're grasping at straws or in fact the second reincarnation of Nostradamus if you are using a post created after your initial accusation and justification for that previous accusation. Along with it being baseless as you and I have different involvements with the two parties.


I'm not here to stop arguments between all members, I'm here to mediate issues between mods/administrators and forum users. If you have a problem with a mod or administrator, then bring it to me, and I'll happily settle it in the most professional and unbiased way possible. Till then, I'm still a forum user and allowed to post my opinions in a non-official capacity just like everyone else on this board.

I never said you shouldn't, debate is healthy. But the topic at hand was the war against Scientology, not Nuto vs Appy. I got involved because Jess laughed as she showed me the post and he insulted someone close to me. Nothing but an insult, which Smoosh has recognized.
You jumped in on an already involved argument which you had no plausible part in. If you are going to jump in on arguments that don't involve you, is the next step taking offense to being called a woman? I hope not, I've read your posts before and I believe you'll do your job well. Don't prove me wrong.


Funny you should attempt to call me out for only taking the side of an American, which is, for the record, not true in the slightest. I also find it amusing that you believe, that because I'm an American, I must be nationalist, and that I must be egotistical and whatever other retarded stereotypes are going through your head. The fact alone that you were the first one to be bring nationalities into this. You sure you're not the one feeling xenophobic? And alas, you came barreling in here to defend Nuto from Appy. Why is that? Could it be she's a woman? Sexist much?

You have enough on your hands so I wouldn't attempt to put words into my mouth. Did I bring up nationality? I brought up a previous argument he had a quoted a signature. And lets not forget that my Alabama comment has absolutely nothing to do with this thread, it was in the other. Did you get lost? Why bring that up here where nationality didn't have a bearing? You wonder why I queried if you were taking all American comments to heart, there is your answer. It wasn't even in this thread but you have made it so.

Oh and, when you insulted the level literacy in Alabama, you did so with haste, and ignorance. When you insulted Appy, you did so with haste and ignorance. This is what we call "foolishness". When you brought up our nationalities, you did so with ignorance and hypocrisy. When first insulted Appy, you did so with hypocrisy.

I put forward my view and the view of a friend of mine who has lived in Alabama and worked directly with the issue in question. We had spoken about this last time I was on Thursday Island which was Over a year or so ago. So I have knowledge of the issue and have discussed it with others for over a year. Where as you don;t have any knowledge of the construction and learning program in Alabama to which I was referring in the "Other" thread and you replied with an insult in a time frame much shorter then the year I had been aware of it. Thus you have been both ignorant and hasty, which by your reckoning corresponds to foolishness and by addition, means your are a hypocrite for calling em one when you are clearly, by definition, foolish yourself.

As for insulting Appy, I did it in haste but I was aware of his post and responded in kind, which laked ignorance. The fact that I was able to link to previous arguments means I had prior knowledge which disproves your ignorance accusation.

And nationalities, you did well enough to bring it to the forefront taking offense to the comment about Alabama. Why do you think I commented about you bringing it into here form elsewhere? And you spouting hypocrisy is hypocrisy in itself. You claimed that me insulting Appy was hypocrisy yet your first interjection into this was in the form of an insult.

How's that for merit?

Rather lacking to be honest. But at least you stated your case, even if part of it was pertaining to another thread and nothing to do with this one. Glad to see you putting up an argument. Well done Jack.

[Apadamek]

You know whats sadder is that so many big hollywood stars have fallen into the stupid trap on this one.

Here is a list of Scientology morons:

This is a religion?

Maybe we should all make up our own version of what we think would have been a cool way for the earth to have started up, and see who has the best, most original ideas. The winner gets a prize.

*Edited by Smooshable*
Apadizamek this is quite clearly unacceptable. You should feel free to argue with her points but speaking to another forum member in this way will not be tollerated.

what points, she doesn't have any!

[The Deity]

Are you blind or just unsure of the words you are typing? Baseless? I was informed by an American who is living in Alabama of his opinions of the literacy. I think if you take the time to look up the definition of baseless you'll find that you are far from correct.

You based your insult off the word a sole man, I'd called that baseless.


And you think you have the experience to refute his information regarding the workshop manuals which you knew absolutely nothing about. Baseless means without basis, I had basis regarding manual conversions, you did not and yet you attempted to argue. The fact that you are still calling it baseless only deepens your hole

Are you romantically involved with Appy? If not then you are less involved in the argument then I and thus you interjected yourself. A out of the blue slur against my girlfriend is in my mind, open justification for my involvement. And you're grasping at straws or in fact the second reincarnation of Nostradamus if you are using a post created after your initial accusation and justification for that previous accusation. Along with it being baseless as you and I have different involvements with the two parties.

Appy is my friend, he is also one of my spammers. But even so, that only warrants my involvement as much as you being "romantically involved" with Nuto. On the other hand, your involvement does warrant mine. Kinda like if you were having a war in game, and someone brought in there allies, it would then be fair to bring in your's. Oh and for the record, I defended Nuto, and did so without insulting Appy, if you do not believe me feel free to ask him.

I'm glad you attempted to defend her, it obviously didn't work as despite me being the one who insulted Appy, he insulted Nuto again in his response post, not me. The purpose of that?
And based on what you said, you claim that your bond to Appy is as close as mine to Nuto? Living in the same house, eating the same food? An insult against her, unfounded as it was, was an insult against me. Appy is well aware of this arrangement, similar events unfolded last time he opened his mouth but he doesn't seem to learn.

I was using the post, not as justification, but as reaffirmation of my point. Just because it came after my initial post, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

So basically you had little or no validation for the comment prior to my response? Unfounded and baseless?

I never said you shouldn't, debate is healthy. But the topic at hand was the war against Scientology, not Nuto vs Appy. I got involved because Jess laughed as she showed me the post and he insulted someone close to me. Nothing but an insult, which Smoosh has recognized.
You jumped in on an already involved argument which you had no plausible part in. If you are going to jump in on arguments that don't involve you, is the next step taking offense to being called a woman? I hope not, I've read your posts before and I believe you'll do your job well. Don't prove me wrong.

You insinuated I shouldn't. I got involved because someone, you, insulted one of my friends, you also insulted Alabama. And it's not that you insulted an American state as much as it is that you insulted someone. I'm not defending them because they're American, as you'd like to believe. But because I believe the insult was unjustified and lacking in truth. Just like I defended Nuto to Appy on MSN.

Lacking in truth? The information came first hand to me, what reason why I have to lie? And it wasn't an insult, it was a paragraph explaining the situation of NASA and Boeing in Alabama. You took offense and then brought it from another thread into here, where it had not been mentioned at all. Hence my inference that after venting your anger there and bringing it here, you did so because it was an attack on America and one of it's states.
Again you brought something in here that was never here to begin with and you jumped in right after an unrelated comment in a separate thread.

You have enough on your hands so I wouldn't attempt to put words into my mouth. Did I bring up nationality? I brought up a previous argument he had a quoted a signature. And lets not forget that my Alabama comment has absolutely nothing to do with this thread, it was in the other. Did you get lost? Why bring that up here where nationality didn't have a bearing? You wonder why I queried if you were taking all American comments to heart, there is your answer. It wasn't even in this thread but you have made it so.

Yes you did, I simply stated...

After the comment in the other thread, after reading you came into this thread to vent.

Well aren't the foolish little hypocrite?

You should be a bit more concerned about the logs in your eyes, then Appy's glass house.

To which you replied....

Or are you just taking all American comments to heart. Feeling a little xenophobic? Funny the timing of this posts appearance in this thread no? Birds of a feather I guess.

I mentioned nothing at all about America or anything else, you brought it up. Then went on to insinuate that I'm xenophobic. Which is ludicrous BTW. Then you went on to infer that because both me and Appy are Americans, that's why I'm defending him.

As stated previously, I believe that you came into this thread throwing words because you were affronted by the comments in the other thread.

Wow even more hypocrisy...

I brought up a previous argument he had a quoted a signature. And lets not forget that my Alabama comment has absolutely nothing to do with this thread, it was in the other.

A previous argument, which just happened to be about America, that wasn't argued in this thread. Now tell me, how does it relate? That's right, it doesn't. So by your own logic, because that argument did not originate in this thread, it's nullified.

It was related because it was substantiating proof of Appy's hypocritical use of the word conceited. Thus it had relevance. The first line of your second post dealt solely with a topic which not only existed outside this thread but also had no relevance to the argument. Argue all you want, you are well aware that bringing that up here was wrong.

I didn't make anything in this thread, you started it by bringing it up. You called Appy a bigot.

One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

I'd say, calling Scientologists morons is bigotry. Thus you're hypocritical for calling Appy out.

I didn't call Scientologists morons, perhaps you should read up again. I was calling Appy out for being hypocritcal for the use of the word conceited, as I have also stated before.

I put forward my view and the view of a friend of mine who has lived in Alabama and worked directly with the issue in question. We had spoken about this last time I was on Thursday Island which was Over a year or so ago. So I have knowledge of the issue and have discussed it with others for over a year. Where as you don;t have any knowledge of the construction and learning program in Alabama to which I was referring in the "Other" thread and you replied with an insult in a time frame much shorter then the year I had been aware of it. Thus you have been both ignorant and hasty, which by your reckoning corresponds to foolishness and by addition, means your are a hypocrite for calling em one when you are clearly, by definition, foolish yourself.

Being aware of something, and studying it are vastly different. And just cause your friend said it, don't make it true. As I've said, I've been to Alabama, and I know and went to college with Alabamans. They were hardly illiterate, and there were a couple that were amongst the brightest in my class. So if I'm guilty of either, it's ignorance, and that's not because I live on the other side of the planet taking the word of some random man.

You're also a random man stating their case, we have no one from Alabama disputing it. And you knew a few smart Alabamans. I never said they were all stupid, I didn't even use the word stupid.
If you want a fair census then you can't base your findings off a few people you went to college with. Steven (The Captain working for NASA) told me about their official findings and what they had to do in response. Herbert Horne published the "Workforce Illiteracy in Alabama: Report of the Survey Group" which found at the time that 55% of the workforce were bellow acceptable working standards. And you're saying a few students who went to college were smart? No kidding... I'm sure if I went to Canada I'd find a few hockey fans too.
Lastly, one can't escape the popular media's representation of the southern USA inhabitants. Rumors usually have a pilot light of truth. Which is a shame, I'm sure there are many Alabamans who are intelligent worldly people. But if they all were, NASA would not have spent million converting their manuals.

As for insulting Appy, I did it in haste but I was aware of his post and responded in kind, which lacked ignorance. The fact that I was able to link to previous arguments means I had prior knowledge which disproves your ignorance accusation.

I was referring to another instance, not the first.

Which in particular? I'd like to know exactly where I acted in ignorance. Was it my assumption that Appy was pro-Anon? As I said, you can hardly be a fence sitter in this conflict and the fact that he didn't respond adversely to any of the anti-Scientology comments prior to the insult suggested that he was against them.

And nationalities, you did well enough to bring it to the forefront taking offense to the comment about Alabama. Why do you think I commented about you bringing it into here form elsewhere? And you spouting hypocrisy is hypocrisy in itself. You claimed that me insulting Appy was hypocrisy yet your first interjection into this was in the form of an insult.

I didn't take offense to the comment, I believe your mind reading "abilities" to be on the fritz, as you were quite wrong here. I didn't bring it in here.

For some one who didn't take offense you have certainly come a long way in their defense. The fact that you also started with an insult doesn't bode well for your argument either.
And you were the first person to utter the world Alabama here, which is pretty irrefutable proof that you brung it here.

Rather lacking to be honest. But at least you stated your case, even if part of it was pertaining to another thread and nothing to do with this one. Glad to see you putting up an argument. Well done Jack.

And you brought up something from another thread, that happened months ago. So in terms of relevance, mine is more relevant.

As I stated earlier, mine was relevant because it provided background evidence for Appy's character which directly influenced his use of the word conceited. You brought in an argument which not only had nothing to do with Scientology but also nothing to do with the argument which concerned App'ys ability to call someone conceited. So no, you lacked relevance and your continued arguments that aren't holding water are only lowering the merit of the posts they are contained in.

[Apadamek]

I'm glad you attempted to defend her, it obviously didn't work as despite me being the one who insulted Appy, he insulted Nuto again in his response post, not me. The purpose of that?
And based on what you said, you claim that your bond to Appy is as close as mine to Nuto? Living in the same house, eating the same food? An insult against her, unfounded as it was, was an insult against me. Appy is well aware of this arrangement, similar events unfolded last time he opened his mouth but he doesn't seem to learn.

He never suggested it was as close as yours to Nuto, he said he was my friend and therefor had a right to jump into the thread. As for my "unfounded" comments on Nuto, how many times to i have to explain that her insulting a Religion, no matter how ridiculous without putting forth any argument to back up that statement pisses me off. if your going to trash something learn about it. As for going after Nuto, i'm going to direct you to the probably dozens of threads by now where she comes off as a total **Filtered**.



It was related because it was substantiating proof of Appy's hypocritical use of the word conceited. Thus it had relevance.
lol.



I didn't call Scientologists morons, perhaps you should read up again. I was calling Appy out for being hypocritcal for the use of the word conceited, as I have also stated before.
No your girlfriend called them morons, and as you said your real close, you eat the same food and live in the same house! Theres nothing hypocritical about using a word.




Which in particular? I'd like to know exactly where I acted in ignorance. Was it my assumption that Appy was pro-Anon? As I said, you can hardly be a fence sitter in this conflict and the fact that he didn't respond adversely to any of the anti-Scientology comments prior to the insult suggested that he was against them.
Did i post after any of the anti-scientology comments? No, hers just seemed the most idiotic of the many. As i said i'm not saying don't insult Scientology, i'm saying don't insult scientology without backing up your points. if nuto had posted
"Scientologists are morons especially their Hollywood members for getting sucked into it because of X and Y" i wouldn't have had a problem


As I stated earlier, mine was relevant because it provided background evidence for Appy's character which directly influenced his use of the word conceited. You brought in an argument which not only had nothing to do with Scientology but also nothing to do with the argument which concerned App'ys ability to call someone conceited. So no, you lacked relevance and your continued arguments that aren't holding water are only lowering the merit of the posts they are contained in.
lol my background evidence of my character, your proof that i can't use a single word is that i had an arrogant signature, gee, i suppose all of Omega or DDE cant use it either because they have a sig saying "So what if the world revolves around us." Oh they can because its a joke? Did you ever shove it through your love struck little brain that mine was as well?

[Spacey]

I had originally locked this, but decided to reopen and state something, generally, and so everyone involved in this has an opportunity to 'turn it all around'.

If there might be the chance that you are taking this topic too personally, as seen in your posts or how you interpret what others write then walk away from the thread.

I don't care who has personal issues with whomever else. It's babysitting and childish behavior like this that plays a part in drawing the forum down.

This is not role playing, and doesn't fall under section 6* of the rules. If someone does not have the ability to continue a conversation appropriately, their ability to continue in their downward spiral will be removed.

Please heed this as a warning.
* viewtopic.php?f=71&t=101808

[Nuto vixen]

Thank you Spacey.


Now what is your opinion on the war against Scientology?

[MGZ]

I have no problem with the war against scientology. to my sensibilities their beliefs are too radical to take seriously or give credence (especially their position on psychological institutions/medicines). Not that I think every little problem should be medicated (far from it), but the complete rejection of such is, to me, just plain stupid.

[Nuto vixen]

I have no problem with the war against scientology. to my sensibilities their beliefs are too radical to take seriously or give credence (especially their position on psychological institutions/medicines). Not that I think every little problem should be medicated (far from it), but the complete rejection of such is, to me, just plain stupid.

Could you imagine how many people we would have walking around our streets, untreated for psychological disorders if they had their way?

I realize that there are a lot of people who are given medication when they probably should not, for example all of the so-called "A.D.D" children, and people who are diagnosed with depression and put on anti-depressants (lots of people I know), but it still doesn't warrant an anti-medicine agenda.