What's new

The Pilot, Excerpts from his Writings

Ogsonofgroo

Crusader
Fluffy said:
...I think that you have a rather unfortunate habit of deriding others. I remember one time when I was feeling pretty dang low on a thread, and you jumped right in...
Ha, my post history says different, but whatever ya think (go find me one deriding of someone other than Hubbard's minions, blatant trolls, or someone attacking someone I respect/like for no good reason and who wasn't capable of defending themselves.) If I recall correctly it was something of the latter which got me to 'jump right in' way back when, and that is all long over and done years ago. Your own not so subtle derisions can be read above in this thread if your at all forgetful and wish to refresh your memory. :)

As for Hubbard, I believe he was both morally and spiritually bankrupt, as well as a sociopathic narcissist, and so much more from the ugly sides of life, and there seems to be huge bodies of work from hundreds of sources to support this. To suggest that Hubbard originated 'Man is basically good.' totally ignores a long list of scholars and philosophers over the centuries who have said this. If his understandings of Hinduism or Buddha were anything but superficial, he might even have reconsidered starting his scam, but as it was, no, his materialistic greed and fuck-tonne of bullshit became what is recognized by most of the world today as a gigantic fraudulent shit-heap of fail.

Anyhow, sorry for offending everyone and the continued derail, I will bite my tongue more often when reading the woo here.

Byeeeee :wave:
 
Derailing 'TEK' Threads - Enemy Op or Sociopathic Disregard for Others?

This thread has been successfully derailed! ...For now.

And since polite attempts to get it back on track haven't gotten cooperation... what do you propose that we do?

I've kept my mouth shut for almost a month, now. But it really wasn't about me WTFing an off-topic, intrusive and unwanted action (reminding us of a certain cult and its regging) - was it? - it was about 'you'-self and your personal crusade to 'clear the planet' of cults and to give blame (and credit!) to Hubbard and his cult for the somewhat workable Tek we've gotten hold of - all to let any mystical processes that might be RTC copyrighted lie there unmolested, in favor of your own special...

Indie CULT AWARENESS NETWORK

Complete with 'cult recovery' tek that we should be using, 'stead of discussing anything resembling a Jack Horner repetitive process...

Especially since we here have been playing around with RTC-copyrighted, eternity-saving processes, that should never, ever, EVER BE SQUIRRELED!!!

Knowingly or not, though, your sector of the anti-cult loners have chosen to position Hubbard as 'source' of the 'Tek' and so therefore, talking 'Tek' is by their logic, 'promoting Hubbard' and we, then, by talking 'Tek' - a thing that RTC would never, ever want done - are by extension, 'Hubbardites'! -

RTC wins here - "only the church talks Tek - we are not going to permit that around heah" - in other words...

LET THE CHURCH KEEP THEIR MONOPOLY ON THE TEK!

Because that is the actual effect of some of these posts, starting with FreeBeingMe #504.

http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...m-his-Writings&p=885299&viewfull=1#post885299

(At least Veda's post is on-topic and points to actual sources of Tek and philosophy - that is actually helpful. I have learned much from Veda.)

And I actually have very little complaint with ToldYouIWasTrouble's occasional, almost playful jabs. At least he/she does not feel they have to impose pages worth of embedded videos that we can easily find elsewhere, and that most of us have seen over and again.

The irony seems to be lost on Mr. Namaste that he's enforcing unwanted, irrelevant, off-topic and rude comments taking up our thread-space, to push his own 'cult-recovery tek'.

FreeBeingMe - if you have sincere justifications for derailing our thread with your 'cult recovery' crusade, I would love to hear them.

If you want, I will happily challenge you on a new, separate thread. I will defend the Tek - yes - Hubbard's Tek (has some decent points, especially considering that I used it to extract his horrific cult from my heavily OSA-programmed 'brain' - successfully extracting myself from his cult, and carrying out a dozen others with me, in the process!).

Are you game for that?

Can you think with letting people share their opinions here, on-topic, without harassment?

You promise to leave these decent people alone and I will show up and give you lots of good opposition. Cuz I do not like 'Hassan' tek, at all... I will argue nearly the same as Marty - that Scio Tek is the best way to undo the Scio cult.

Note that not all of us love Hubbard around here. Not even all of us love Ken, the Pilot. But whether you do or not, The Pilot struck a mighty blow at the RTC monopoly of the Tek, and I have trouble seeing why it would hurt you or anyone else, for us to further that with our humble little group here.
 
Ha, my post history says different, but whatever ya think (go find me one deriding of someone other than Hubbard's minions, blatant trolls, or someone attacking someone I respect/like for no good reason and who wasn't capable of defending themselves.) If I recall correctly it was something of the latter which got me to 'jump right in' way back when, and that is all long over and done years ago. Your own not so subtle derisions can be read above in this thread if your at all forgetful and wish to refresh your memory. :)

As for Hubbard, I believe he was both morally and spiritually bankrupt, as well as a sociopathic narcissist, and so much more from the ugly sides of life, and there seems to be huge bodies of work from hundreds of sources to support this. To suggest that Hubbard originated 'Man is basically good.' totally ignores a long list of scholars and philosophers over the centuries who have said this. If his understandings of Hinduism or Buddha were anything but superficial, he might even have reconsidered starting his scam, but as it was, no, his materialistic greed and fuck-tonne of bullshit became what is recognized by most of the world today as a gigantic fraudulent shit-heap of fail.

Anyhow, sorry for offending everyone and the continued derail, I will bite my tongue more often when reading the woo here.

Byeeeee :wave:

actually - I have revised my opinion of Hubbard - I think he was an unappreciated genuis comedy performance actor. I have been reading Miller - the Bald Faced Messiah and it is funny as all get out. He tells such whoppers it is a wonder he can keep a straight face. I think he was a great fan of his bent sense of humor and I am just now beginning to appreciate it. - Telling people how he was shot in the buttocks and the bullet messed up his urinary system so he can't pee properly - I was rolling on the floor when I read that one. :hysterical:

Mimsey
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation

:stickpoke:


Lol! I'm loving the stroppy, straight speaking Indies around here (you very much included Watchful) because you say what you mean and own it ... it brings the board to life (esp when things are quiet) and has to be a good thing for everyone irrelevant of agreement and even content.

Vive la strop! (its so much less boooooooring than phony 'ARC' triangles).


:coolwink:
 

Claire Swazey

Spokeshole, fence sitter
Ha, my post history says different, but whatever ya think (go find me one deriding of someone other than Hubbard's minions, blatant trolls, or someone attacking someone I respect/like for no good reason and who wasn't capable of defending themselves.) If I recall correctly it was something of the latter which got me to 'jump right in' way back when, and that is all long over and done years ago. Your own not so subtle derisions can be read above in this thread if your at all forgetful and wish to refresh your memory. :)

As for Hubbard, I believe he was both morally and spiritually bankrupt, as well as a sociopathic narcissist, and so much more from the ugly sides of life, and there seems to be huge bodies of work from hundreds of sources to support this. To suggest that Hubbard originated 'Man is basically good.' totally ignores a long list of scholars and philosophers over the centuries who have said this. If his understandings of Hinduism or Buddha were anything but superficial, he might even have reconsidered starting his scam, but as it was, no, his materialistic greed and fuck-tonne of bullshit became what is recognized by most of the world today as a gigantic fraudulent shit-heap of fail.

Anyhow, sorry for offending everyone and the continued derail, I will bite my tongue more often when reading the woo here.

Byeeeee :wave:

Oh, I just meant that yeah, of course you were right that I was in a posting binge. But I'm rather proud of myself. I cut way back on posting in the past few months- even when I lost my job. So I think that made the "Binge" more noticeable since I'd been doing so well. But yeah, you posted a bunch this week, too, is all I'm saying. You're like the 4th person today to comment about my posting a bunch lately and, no offense, truly, but I find such an observation from people who are posting right then to be rather pointless.

The deriding thing seems to be a bit on the ongoing side, actually, which means, yeah, happened in the past, still is going on. I really don't want to hurt your feelings, though. Honestly. We all tease and blow off steam, myself included. I just don't think there's any substitute for civilized debate. I think things can get too meanspirited.

As far as Hubbard goes, well, sure. You should hear what J and I sometimes say to each other about CofS and about Hubbard. I do think he had some neat ideas and perspectives. I do think some of the discussions in this thread are pretty cool. Ideas can be addressed and experimented with, regardless of their origination.

I recently read Zealot by Reza Aslan. Plus, I'd read other stuff about Christianity before that. There are compelling arguments to show that Jesus - and other prophets and messiahs who are in high regard- were not what we thought. Yet people still derive comfort, spirituality and insight from their ideas.


I actually think you seem like you're probably an ok person, though, of course, I've not met you. I think I kinda have a short fuse today as there has been a lot of mocking and deriding on ESMB in the past few days and when one tries to be courteous and write an actual response and answer someone's question earnestly and at length, it still does not always work out.

I think we are all better than that and have the capacity to be better than that.

I am glad that not everyone in the world has the same beliefs. But I do hope there's room for more than one type and that maybe critiques and challenges to those can be mentally stimulating and enjoyable rather than letting people know one thinks that they should just DIAF or something.
 

Cat's Squirrel

Gold Meritorious Patron

:stickpoke:

Lol! I'm loving the stroppy, straight speaking Indies around here (you very much included Watchful) because you say what you mean and own it ... it brings the board to life (esp when things are quiet) and has to be a good thing for everyone irrelevant of agreement and even content.

Vive la strop! (its so much less boooooooring than phony 'ARC' triangles).

:coolwink:

I have to agree, but what spoIls it IMO is people then saying, "Ooohh, he (or she) isn't a very good advert for the Tech (or whatever they do) because he (or she) really lost it back there."

In return for a bit more "honesty", can we have some mutual tolerance and an admission that we quite likely all have areas where we're vulnerable and likely to be "set off" by things, and that it isn't a big deal if this happens?
 
Last edited:

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation
I have to agree, but what spoIls it IMO is people then saying, "Ooohh, he (or she) isn't a very good advert for the Tech (or whatever they do) because he (or she) really lost it back there."

In return for a bit more "honesty", can we have some mutual tolerance and an admission that we quite likely all have areas where we're vulnerable and likely to be "set off" by things, and that it isn't a big deal if this happens?


I'd love to say 'yes' to that but it would be pointless ... if you and I were out having lunch though of course that would be possible (assuming we genuinely liked and respected each other) but here on a message board it just can't work (long-term) because what you are asking for is effectively another 'rule of conduct' which dampens easy communication among people who are at different stages of 'de-culting' themselves.

Having said that if we ever find ourselves 'out to lunch' (together) I promise to be utterly respectful, tolerant and I'll even pour the tea!


:batseyelashes:
 

Cat's Squirrel

Gold Meritorious Patron


I'd love to say 'yes' to that but it would be pointless ... if you and I were out having lunch though of course that would be possible (assuming we genuinely liked and respected each other) but here on a message board it just can't work (long-term) because what you are asking for is effectively another 'rule of conduct' which dampens easy communication among people who are at different stages of 'de-culting' themselves.

Having said that if we ever find ourselves 'out to lunch' (together) I promise to be utterly respectful, tolerant and I'll even pour the tea!

:batseyelashes:

If we ever did meet I'd much rather see you as you actually are, respectful or no :) I suspect you'd prefer that too. Besides, there's enough people who like you on here anyway (as you've no doubt realised) for you not to have to worry about putting on an act for anybody.

On the subject of ESMB, I've had some good conversations here with people by pm after I felt they'd gone "over the top" on the forum. They probably needed to say it, and I probably needed to hear it (even if I didn't like it at the time).

One of my favourite sayings; everybody's learning.
 

Winston Smith

Flunked Scientology
I have to agree, but what spoIls it IMO is people then saying, "Ooohh, he (or she) isn't a very good advert for the Tech (or whatever they do) because he (or she) really lost it back there."

In return for a bit more "honesty", can we have some mutual tolerance and an admission that we quite likely all have areas where we're vulnerable and likely to be "set off" by things, and that it isn't a big deal if this happens?

HA, I don't know why this made a thought pop into my pea sized brain, but I think I have found that the older one gets the more mellow one becomes. There are glaring exceptions of course, but like an old cello, I am mellowing to the point of not getting upset much any longer. I have some neighbors who are young kids, and they are so idealistic. They think things should be a certain way because they think it is right and moral. Well, I have not told them this, but there are all kinds of people in this world. It would be wonderful if everyone got along, but in Realville that does not happen.

So someone gets "set off." Hmm. OK.
 

I told you I was trouble

Suspended animation
If we ever did meet I'd much rather see you as you actually are, respectful or no :) I suspect you'd prefer that too. Besides, there's enough people who like you on here anyway (as you've no doubt realised) for you not to have to worry about putting on an act for anybody.

On the subject of ESMB, I've had some good conversations here with people by pm after I felt they'd gone "over the top" on the forum. They probably needed to say it, and I probably needed to hear it (even if I didn't like it at the time).

One of my favourite sayings; everybody's learning.


I wouldn't know how to 'put on an act' these days Cats ... I left all that behind when I dumped the cult.


:)
 
The Pilot, Excerpts from his Writings -- Admin notice

Admin Notice
-
Dear Reader of this.

We have been running this Pilot Excerpts thread for some time - nearly 90 weekly extracts.

I have been supplied with them by a little Pilot nerd, who has carefully classified and archived them and now carefully selected for you. This nerd now emails me (from [email protected]) the following message:

"As this year slowly is approaching its end [messages from @secretplace.nowhere.com go through a negative time warp, and this was obviously sent at the end of last year] I’ve been thinking whether the same should be the case about sending out Pilot articles. I have usually tried to avoid his late period, but gradually running out of unpublished material, you may have noticed that the latest posts are from 1999, after the exposure of Ken – and although there are many articles from that period that I consider good, I feel less certain about his work from there. In fact, there are some that I would never choose to send out at all. We could of course go hunting in the Self Clearing book (or Super Scio), but both are easily available with contents and so forth and so do not so much merit a selection as the ca. 3.000 pages of Posts without contents or index."​

In other words, dear Excerpts from the Pilot's work reader. You have had it. That's it. The end. Finish. And in Danish: Slut.

However to provide a less sudden end, I will be sending out in the next four weeks, some replays of the Pilot's reposts, and next Tuesday, something from his Super Scio.

Thanks for your participation. I have a plan for resending out The Pilot's "Cosmic History" in installments (the eighth and last time I will be doing it), and you will be advised of that when it happens.

All best wishes,

Ant
 

Cat's Squirrel

Gold Meritorious Patron
Just some odds and sods from as and when I remember them. This is from post 34;


==========================================


subj : Super Scio - To A-J On Cluelessness

TO A-J ON CLUELESSNESS


On 11 Aug 98, [email protected] reponded to an FZA repost of
my writup on "SCIENTOLOGY RELIGIOUS TECH AND COPYRIGHTS"


> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] wrote:
> > SCIENTOLOGY RELIGIOUS TECH AND COPYRIGHTS
> >
> >
>
> > In the current hate filled atmosphere encouraged by the
> > CofS, where they label any freezoner's as "squirrels" and
> > subject to any form of mistreatment, it is not even possible
> > for a known freezoner to walk into a CofS organization and
> > purchase materials since they are officially barred from the
> > organization.
> >
>
> Dear Mr. Pilot,
>
> Why is there all this goddamned fuss about wanting to go into the
> C of $ to get Hubbard's materials? Why don't you ask your German
> counterparts - they have the Robertson bridge up to OT 40. It's
> right in their home page.
>
> A-J
>
> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
> http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum


Indeed thou art clueless.

I'm not a Robertson follower.

I'm a follower of 1950s LRH Scientology.

That Scientology, unlike yours (which is a watered down scam),
allows for multiple sources and extending the tech.

In those days, Ron was only an organizer of data and not
source (by his own statement). It includes how to intelligently
separate the wheat from the chaff. That is how we got all those
great datums from Crowly and Science of Mind and the Rosecrucians
and the Tibetan Book of the Dead and endless other sources.

They did not have an adequate logic structure to evaluate their
own data and evolve a workable tech.

Ron did. That is his genius. That was the breakthrough.

With KSW in 1965, he lies and claims to be the single source
even though he was acknowledging other sources as late as 1963.
From there on there is more and more hostility towards further
research and the subject gradually becomes a fanaticism.

As to an evaluation of stats, OT phenomena used to be common
and now are virtualy non-existant in the subject. Ron used
to talk a mile a minute full of brilliant ideas and then he
shut up like a clam (hundreds of tapes a year, and then a
handful, and then none).

The 1950s material is incomplete. It was always known to be
incomplete. It was a research line. It was the best
leap towards freedom that this planet has ever had.
Unfortunately we missed the grab at the top of our jump
and fell back down.

There is good later data. But it is trapped in a ridgid
framework that does not support really producing OTs
or completing the research.

So I follow early Ron from the days when he was most inspired.

And then I follow his orders to evaluate and extend the
subject and mix in anything that you can find that works.

So I mix in the later materials, but I do so with the same
critical eye that I would use to judge things coming in from
EST or Krishnamurti.

So I look at sec checks and toss them out the window because
accoring to the basics and according to early Ron, they
will make people mean and nasty due to unbalanced flows
(and Sea Org behavior amply illustrates that he was right
the first time). But I look at real grade 2 processes and
they fit in with the basics just fine.

As to Robertson, I like him but he goes through the same
logic sieve as everyone else.

I'm glad that Robertson's folks are auditing just as I'm glad
that CofS is auditing (when they do - usually they just reg
people and then waste the hours on sec checking at cadillac
prices).

But my goal is to see the tech evolve into something that
really can produce a stable OT (rather than just giving out
OT numbers on pieces of paper).

For that my greatest inspiration is Ron in the 1952-4 period.
And I do not want to commit the overt of obscuring the
sources I am working from. So I want all who follow me
to have access to those same source materials.

So I am still a follower of Hubbard. But not the later
stupidity. The formation of the Sea Org was an overt
product.

That is why your statement was totally clueless.

And another bit of cluelessness that you have been spouting
about is your concern about Oldtimer possibly being located
in Southern California.

It is meaningless. Both the German Freezone and Freezone
America are International in scope and overlap everywhere.
There are (or were) Roberston style orgs in both New York
and Los Angeles. There are also dozens of non-Robertson
style orgs in these places.

And Freezone America is an information clearinghouse
(with a stong Pilot bias, but carrying everything they
can) rather than a specific organizational network.
They inspire orgs rather than controlling them.

Still clueless or is this finally sinking in?


The Pilot
 
Last edited:

Ogsonofgroo

Crusader
Just a small, possibly unworthy, thought on your compilation Anthony, why not put them in your blog spot here? It is a perfectly viable/working spot that every member has, and you can moderate and change things yourself, as well as continue any discussions there too. As well, should you ever find the need to, it makes it easy to C/P the whole enchilada to somewhere else :) Maybe Watchful can help you with it as he/she/it seems to be concerned about derailments etc., if you blog it you can get everything in chronological order and without discussions getting in the way.
Just a wee thought du-jour.

:cheers:

Ogs
 
Last edited:

Leon

Gold Meritorious Patron
The only way I'd ever want to see you is naked and in my bed. Who cares whether you're acting or not
 

Ogsonofgroo

Crusader
Re: Your thought de jour ...




:omg:


Full marks for subtlety Leon ... but I'm not at all sure if Ogs is that way inclined.


:giggle:

Good chrispy-fried-horny-toads, I was hoping he was referring to a post back there I missed, but.... Leon honey, with all due respect I am flattered, but don't swing that way, I know I know, life can be cruel at times :melodramatic:
 

Cat's Squirrel

Gold Meritorious Patron
Re: Your thought de jour ...

Good chrispy-fried-horny-toads, I was hoping he was referring to a post back there I missed, but.... Leon honey, with all due respect I am flattered, but don't swing that way, I know I know, life can be cruel at times :melodramatic:

:biggrin: I think Leon was referring to Trouble's post #610 (replying to my post #608 about her "putting on an act").

Still, good to see he's clearly well on the way to recovery from his heart op last year :)
 

Leon

Gold Meritorious Patron
Yes indeed I am CS. Thank you. It was the heart op and then later the full on heart attack and then later back into hospital for them to get the goddam medications right.

I have found that swimming is the best form of exercise for me - I go to the pool three times a week and am working myself up to doing half a K each time. Still a little way to go though. Feeling very good from it.

Have a good new year to you!

Troublebabe - my darling Lou over here is not to keen on the idea either so we'll just leave it all in the realm of dreams. :eyeroll::eyeroll::eyeroll:
 

Udarnik

Gold Meritorious Patron
All right, you know I'm hostile to the tech in it's entirety and think the entire past lives thing is bullshit, but I'll offer this Ina genuine attempt to bridge the understanding gap between people with a scientific, materialist mindset and the Indie mindset I see on this thread. At the very least I hope you come to understand our instinctive hostility to the way you approach this. The fundamental difference is contained in the following contrasting quotes:

"As this year slowly is approaching its end [messages from @secretplace.nowhere.com go through a negative time warp, and this was obviously sent at the end of last year] I’ve been thinking whether the same should be the case about sending out Pilot articles. I have usually tried to avoid his late period, but gradually running out of unpublished material, you may have noticed that the latest posts are from 1999, after the exposure of Ken – and although there are many articles from that period that I consider good, I feel less certain about his work from there. In fact, there are some that I would never choose to send out at all. We could of course go hunting in the Self Clearing book (or Super Scio), but both are easily available with contents and so forth and so do not so much merit a selection as the ca. 3.000 pages of Posts without contents or index."

Contrast that attitude with this, from Cargo Cult Science by Richard Feynman:

Now it behooves me, of course, to tell you what they're missing. But it would be just about as difficult to explain to the South Sea islanders how they have to arrange things so that they get some wealth in their system. It is not something simple like telling them how to improve the shapes of the earphones. But there is one feature I notice that is generally missing in cargo cult science. That is the idea that we all hope you have learned in studying science in school--we never say explicitly what this is, but just hope that you catch on by all the examples of scientific investigation. It is interesting, therefore, to bring it out now and speak of it explicitly. It's a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty--a kind of leaning over backwards. For example, if you're doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it invalid--not only what you think is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; and things you thought of that you've eliminated by some other experiment, and how they worked--to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been eliminated.

Do you see how the first bold section looks to someone with the scientific mindset? You're as much as admitting that you are cherry picking. You get to decide what's important and what's useful, not the end user of the data. That's exactly what you accuse Ron of doing, isn't it? We all admit Ken went off the rails. You, or your sources more precisely, are hiding information that may be pertinent. It may be that an outside eye, looking at the "obviously" squirrelly stuff, will find that it IS a logical extension of some of the stuff you are now considering in this thread and some of the data presented here should be avoided even though it looks innocuous. I had exactly that conversation with Veda on another thread about the Comm course and Laffy's reason for including it.

Frankly, I'm curious to see all the data because I think Ken was a few sandwiches short of a picnic from the git-go, and all of this happy horseshit conspired to drive him over the edge. Your mileage obviously varies on that point, but I think you owe it to the people following this to have the complete dataset at their disposal, not just what you deem is important. At the very least, they may be able to see positives you didn't, but it is my hope that if there are problems in the stuff you are publishing that some extremely susceptible people may see the danger signs for themselves and walk away when they feel things getting out of control. Having you claim that you've vetted all the material may give them a false sense of security and have them turn off their own early warning systems.

I have a sister in law who is schizophrenic. Unfortunately, she also belongs to a Buddhist cult. A while after she first got on a stable regimen of meds, she went chanting with the peanut heads for over 10 hours. Chanting that long can trigger hallucinations even in neurotypicals, but she didn't know that, and she went right back in the hospital again. If the monks had been open about the other people who had had episodes chanting that long, maybe she would have been saved a hospital stay, and her husband would have not been threatened with a knife because she thought he was a Communist agent come to get her.

Otherwise, that statement about ending the excerpts because you don't see anything else useful in them reads to me to come from the logical position my daughter likes to call "cherry picking cheaters".
 
All right, you know I'm hostile to the tech in it's entirety and think the entire past lives thing is bullshit...

<snip>

Otherwise, that statement about ending the excerpts because you don't see anything else useful in them reads to me to come from the logical position my daughter likes to call "cherry picking cheaters".

Udarnik - you just dumped another ignorant load of horseshit on our page. With the same, worn-out justification. You are going to save the world from the 'Tek' because you know best.

I will offer you the same as I did earlier. You start a thread (or PM me and I will) on what's workable and what's not, about the 'Tek' and what is actually so dangerous about it, without fraudulently invoking the experiences of someone who was given a date-rape drug and destroyed mentally, for the exact purpose you are forwarding - to position the 'Tek' as "dangerous"... and I promise to show up and post.

I will defend the workable majority of the 'Tek,' and concede where it is in fact, "dangerous."

Otherwise, STFU.
 
Top