Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Scientology Discussion' started by Type4_PTS, Dec 18, 2017.
You appear to be unfamiliar with the basic principles of American Jurisprudence.
Burden of proof is entirely on the Plaintiff, NOT the defendent.
And it is not surprising that you are unable to find someone willing to wallow in self degradation by playing the role of The Whining Weenie so you can use them to present a Dog and Pony Show
I love that scene Pitsy.
Now that scene is played straight up in the context of the flick. The really cool scene is the one where Hollywood continues it's ongoing conversation about Hubbard and his work where Nicholson (supposedly) looks Cruise dead in the eye (pretty boy probably wasn't even on the set when the scene was shot) and says "You can't handle the truth!"
Ohhh! I didn't realize we were in a court of law.
Wait, we're not in a court of law and you are a troll - doing standard troll stuff. YOU made the absurd claim that a child being locked in a filthy chain locker for days was not child abuse. YOU were challenged to back that up and YOU went all quibbly but never came up with anything to back up YOUR assertion. Now YOU fall back on the old troll saw "no you prove I'm wrong!!!"
Screw you. Go away.
I have certainly been screwed pretty damn badly at times, Bill.
Co$ sucks pretty damn bad and in fact my first born son suffered a wrongful death because his uncle, Greg Wilhere blocked my path to him while he was being treated for leukemia.
Not that you give a damn about me or my sons, of course.
If you would actually read my posts you would see that on a SUBJECTIVE level I have on this thread AGAIN affirmed that I consider the chain locker to be [reasonably and forgivably mild] child abuse.
I don't have to prove you have no case in or out of court if you can't produce a case
So where is your case?
If you have one then present it for examination, cross examination and rebuttal, none of which are the province of trolls.
It is YOUR ASSERTION that locking a child in a filthy chain locker for days is "reasonably and forgivably mild" abuse!! That's absurd! It is neither reasonable nor forgivable! I'm "reasonable and forgiving" so I've tried to let YOU make the case for YOUR ASSERTION. The fact that you can't or won't is YOUR problem not mine. You are either ignorant or stupid -- I'll go with the idea that you are ignorant because I'm loath to call anyone stupid.
If one were to treat you in the fashion you do others they'd demand evidence of your allegations you've made against Greg Wilhere, and if you produced any they'd do everything possible to invalidate that evidence and minimize the impact of any harm caused by him.
Given that there's been more than one member here on this forum who did spend time in the chain locker, including at least one active member who spent a week in the chain locker as an eleven year old girl, Bill's characterization of you as a "troll" seems way too kind.
I didn't know there was a trial going on here. I thought this was just a rather heated discussion. Do we need a judge or jury?
I know you said you are an AUDITOR. Are you also an attorney?
Why did Greg Wilhere block your path to your son when he was being treated for leukemia?
That sounds rather heart wrenching. Did you manage to see him at all before he died?
deceit used in order to achieve one's goal.
synonyms: trickery, intrigue, deviousness, deceit, deception, dishonesty, cheating, duplicity, guile, cunning, craftiness, chicanery, pretense, fraud, fraudulence
Vumba was in for a week at the age of eleven. (just by the way, if one wants to do something like the chain locker in kosher fashion, twelve is the cutoff age)
I DON'T see her whining about it.
Yes I suppose I'll get to telling the story
But it will not begin invalidation as I have been loudly invalidated continually since I first joined
This is NOT the way I treat others. I respect and have genuine affection for all esmb posters. I never personally invalidate them. But since, for instance, howling about the chain locker trivializes truly serious child abuse e.g. a middle age woman who worked in the office at Town Taxi was from a middle class Jewish family where one would be less likely to find such conduct but she was often beaten as a child. the worst episode required 147 stitches to patch it up.
Moreover, as any competent auditor will affirm auditing has much to offer an adult seeking release from the aftermath of childhood abuse and the study of dianetics can reduce a parents liklihood of being a child abuser.
This is not the way I treat others
Yes indeedy! Hubbard and his work were exposed, debunked and tossed on the trash heap of history by Xmas of 1950 and have been continuously exposed, debunked and tossed ever since.
And I certainly have a say in the matter as I live and my writings might well be a significant factor after I shed the mortal coil in as much as the book I have published may make an historic figure of me in my own right
Pitsy that is no revelation
I'm an A-ticket player.
This is always how A-ticket players treat honchos
You swing with the honcho or you get the fuck out of his way.
And the antiscilons aren't attracting any A-ticket players. All you get is pustulent rabble like Gibney
I like this!
No I did not say it is not child abuse, I said it is not serious child abuse and people who harp on such a small transgression DECADES later TRIVIALIZE SERIOUS CHILD ABUSE
It's a fine distinction but as I did say categorically the child was unharmed and can not back that up as stated let me rephrase it as there is no indication of any harm having been done and children are quite well known for being resilient.
Always a pleasure to be shaved by someone who knows how to strop a keen edge on his straightrazor Bill.
The chain locker is definitively child abuse because the capstan makes it reckless endangerment
The other factors of harsh conditions make it borderline abuse. Any anthropologist will tell you most tribal societies visit harsher ordeals on their young
Would it be child abuse to confine a child to his bedroom for 48 hrs?
Are you seriously comparing 48 hours in a chain locker to 48 hours in the kids bedroom? That is like saying not letting a kid have dessert one night is the same as starving him for a week! Absolutely no comparison.
My views on child rearing are a little arcane compared to today's common practices (I did spank, the kids do chores, they also have to spend time helping take care of the grand parents (which they actually like now) I have soaped a month or two, once they learned how to play a game I don't "let" them win, if they want something they have to earn the money to buy it etc) but even I would consider ANY time spent in a chain locker child abuse!!
While there are differences in physical and mental abuses you really can't judge or classify how mentally abusive something was until after the abuse happens and how it affect the child. For example locking a child in a cold dark closet for 8 hours would be abusive but the trauma of it may have lasting effects on one child where another will just brush it off and never think of it again. Both children suffered abuse, you can't say it's not child abuse because one child had no lasting effects. You can't say its not child abuse because there were no physical injuries or marks, mental abuse is just as bad and often worse than physical abuse.
Stop making excuses for Hubbard. He was an abusive man. That is a fact and there is no denying it. Even if you like the tech, it doesn't change this fact. Being abusive is not exclusive, one can be other things too.