What's new
By:
Filters

The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Maria Cuervo said:
Some thoughts for my friends here on this thread, whether FZ, totally out like me, or Indie.

Attacking Others
I have always tried not to attack specific persons or accuse them of things. I once speculated on something Terril said. However, I was being hypothetical. I never intended that what I said was more than speculative. I regretted that and it's the only time I know of that something I said could be taken personally and I was sorry it happened.

Criticizing Christians
There is no time I have criticized Christians on this forum. I know this because I have only posted about that topic on the comments section of my Age of Answers blog post. I never really discuss that topic. I only posted it when asked by Lakey as a question. In general I don't discuss my religious beliefs because this is about Scientology here. I have never judged Christians and changed the concept of God oir Christianity on this forum. I have never explained partly because never fully been asked to explain what my view of Christianity is. If I were going to explain it, I would do it in a different thread which pertained to non-Scientology beliefs since I would not want to tax Lakey's thread with things which might not be of interest to non-Christians. I want to be considerate.

Talking about Christianity
I don't talk about Christianity because I am here to talk about being an ex-Scientologist. How and when I would ever feel it appropriate to share on Christianity? I don't proselytize. If that is being a 'bad' Christian, such is life. There are different ways to convey things other than shouting dogma at others. I prefer to talk to others and let them be. Christianity is conveyed through actions, not just words. The recent actions in the thread do not seem Christian by any stretch of the imagination. What these actions were is yet to be determined.

Answering questions
I have always been forthcoming and answered questions. Accusations are quite different. Anyone wanting to know what 'faith alone' is could simply ask me, what do you mean by 'faith alone?' This would be a lot nicer than rushing to the ridicule. BTW I provided a wiki link to this term, faith alone, in a previous post. I can only answer one question at a time, not a barrage. A barrage is what Scn loves to do. Like they did to Rinder in the doctor's parking area.


Philosophy, religion, and me
I don't believe that technology and philosophy are the same thing as religion. I don't think that these are compatible. Not at all. There is no philosophy or tech that pertains to religion in my opinion, for me. Techniques imply works needing to be done via human means to be free. Faith alone means that I don't feel that 'works' or techniques help me. I have written about this in a blog post. And since I am a philosopher, not a theologian, I never claimed expertise in religion. I have never posted much on that topic anyway. I don't view Scientology as religion or philosophy or tech so what I post on is a cult. I know about that because I was in it. So I do have expertise in the cult and can post about that experience and knowledge. So I do speak out on what I know, mostly for my own clarification and to do memory lane with all of you.

Conclusion
Questions are welcome from my friends here but I am out of town for a day and cannot answer until tomorrow sometime, thus a delay. Take care. :biggrin:
This thread is exciting and fun, never a dull moment! Hurrah! And thank you for that Lakey.
Click to expand...

Maria, thank you for this excellent post. It really clarifies where you are coming from. I love you paragraph on Philosophy, "Religion and me". As to your last paragraph, getting a compliment about the thread is very appreciated. I attempt to try and not allow a lot of dull moments and provide some fun but there is a limit to what a moderator can do. I is the people who post here and make comments who, create a lively thread.
 
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

MrNobody said:
Well, here's my understanding...
Atheist: "There is no god. Period."
Agnostic: "I know of no god."

Depending on my mood-of-the-day, either one or the other fits for me. My definitions don't need to be more complicated than that. :coolwink:
Click to expand...

Theism, atheism, and anti-theism are subsets of "belief" which is the acceptance of truth or falseness of a position without certain knowledge. Gnosis and agnosis are conditions of knowledge. One either knows or does not. Given "infinity" a finite being can gave no certain knowledge. Therefore all positions on infinity fall under belief rather than knowledge. EVERYONE is agnostic on infinity. One simply cannot KNOW there is or isn't a god. Evidence or presupposion now enter in. I am an atheist because I see no evidence to accept anyone's prior claims of gods and believe me that I've looked at most of the apologies theists have given and the critiques. This does not just apply to christians nor even to monotheists. Pantheists as well. I am agnostic to the degree that I don't KNOW there is no god. I just find the likelyhood to be many orders of magnitude to the right of the decimal point.
 
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

lkwdblds said:
Sheila, thank you for all the effort you put into your post, and for giving me links to sites which will clear up what the differences are between various Christian denominations. I am going to check out those links and get myself better educated in Christianity.

In my self perceived role as a mediator on this thread, I just took a stab at moderating a dispute. I now realize that I was in error for doing that. It was not my place to make guesses and present scenarios on a subject which in which I am not knowledgeable. My goal to mediate may have been okay, but I really had no business butting in on an exchange which was going on between two regular posters on the thread.

It is not my place to speak for Maria, she has been doing a pretty damn good job of speaking for herself since she has arrived on this thread. As Maria has pointed out, the purpose of this thread is to concern itself with scientology and ex scientology. Sure the Apollo thread has traditionally got into other major topics but if two regulars here disagree on an outside topic, I should stay out of their dispute or at least check with them first via PM's to see if it is okay with them if I put in my 2 cents. Ditto for all other posters as well. In summary, I should have stayed out of this but instead I wrote something, doing a bypass on Maria by writing speculations in an subject in which I am not knowledgeable. That was a huge screw up on my part and I apologize profusely.
Lakey
Click to expand...

Hi Lakey,

This part of the discussion was good and a nice break from the disagreement between Maria and I. I doubt anyone was offended by what you said - I certainly was not. It would have been nice if you nudged her to simply answer the questions - Does she believe in Jesus as Saviour and Messiah? Does she believe in a Trinity? If not, by definition, she's not a Christian - a religion which she states she "decided to join" on her blog post. Pronouncing a belief in the general concept of love is not enough to share a group's religious beliefs that set it apart from other groups. That's irrational.

So you know, this is a carryover from when Maria arrogantly bashed the Christian concept of God on another thread. I was floored to see her calling herself a Christian on this thread and her blog post afterward. If she claimed any other religion, it wouldn't matter. Of course other religions don't view it the same way, that's why they are different religions.

But I tire of Maria's rhetoric. It smacks of Scientology. Everything from the vast, broad claims of having superior knowledge to others when she knows little of the religions she purports to know, to the inability to admit when she is mistaken, to the lashing out and attacking, accusing and blaming anyone who would disagree with her to the victimish positioning when someone comes along who does have more knowledge on that particular subject. Then there is the stealthy steering around a subject or question and the efforts to avoid same and the redefining of words or terms beyond their actual use in the original quote. Leon often posts and debates in this circular fashion, too, but at least he is upfront and honest about his beliefs. Top it all off with Maria's demonstrated lack of education on basic grammar despite claimed superior education, her repeated denial of actual quoted statements made - I just don't find anything she claims or says about herself to be reliable or trustworthy.

Of note is also the fact that she has sent an enormous number of PMs to many different ESMB members to personally promote herself to them since she arrived just less than four weeks ago.

I don't regret pointing that out to others, either. Is she really gone for the weekend, as she said? It appears not.

However, I regret and apologise for this happening on your thread, which has always been a good place for discussions on different topics. Sorry, Lakey. I will not engage Maria anymore here, Lakey, and wish you and others here a good day. :hug:
 
Last edited:
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

JustSheila said:
Hi Lakey,

This part of the discussion was good and a nice break from the disagreement between Maria and I. I doubt anyone was offended by what you said - I certainly was not. It would have been nice if you nudged her to simply answer the questions - Does she believe in Jesus as Saviour and Messiah? Does she believe in a Trinity? If not, by definition, she's not a Christian - a religion which she states she "decided to join" on her blog post. Pronouncing a belief in the general concept of love is not enough to share a group's religious beliefs that set it apart from other groups. That's irrational.

So you know, this is a carryover from when Maria arrogantly bashed the Christian concept of God on another thread. I was floored to see her calling herself a Christian on this thread and her blog post afterward. If she claimed any other religion, it wouldn't matter. Of course other religions don't view it the same way, that's why they are different religions.

But I tire of Maria's rhetoric. It smacks of Scientology. Everything from the vast, broad claims of having superior knowledge to others when she knows little of the religions she purports to know, to the inability to admit when she is mistaken, to the lashing out and attacking, accusing and blaming anyone who would disagree with her to the victimish positioning when someone comes along who does have more knowledge on that particular subject. Then there is the stealthy steering around a subject or question and the efforts to avoid same and the redefining of words or terms beyond their actual use in the original quote. Leon often posts and debates in this circular fashion, too, but at least he is upfront and honest about his beliefs. Top it all off with Maria's demonstrated lack of education on basic grammar despite claimed superior education, her repeated denial of actual quoted statements made - I just don't find anything she claims or says about herself to be reliable or trustworthy.

Of note is also the fact that she has sent an enormous number of PMs to many different ESMB members to personally promote herself to them since she arrived just less than four weeks ago.

I don't regret pointing that out to others, either. Is she really gone for the weekend, as she said? It appears not.

However, I regret and apologise for this happening on your thread, which has always been a good place for discussions on different topics. Sorry, Lakey. I will not engage Maria anymore here, Lakey, and wish you and others here a good day. :hug:
Click to expand...

Thanks for your take on these matters Sheila. I really don't think it is appropriate for me to get personally involved or take sides in a disagreement between two people who are posting on this thread. When all is said and done, I am just another poster here, my only distinction being that I started the thread. Since the thread's co founder, CO2, found it necessary to not post anymore I created a hat for myself as a moderator. I did that to give the thread some cohesiveness and continuity. All the moderator hat really does is to welcome newcomers to the thread and then acknowledge them when I feel that have written something which I believe to be of high quality.

When I learned to acknowledge people's communications, that simple bit of knowledge empowered me quite a bit. I do it here and CO2 does it as well and I firmly believe that the acts of welcoming posters and acknowledging what they have to say pays off in creating a thread which is safe to post on.

Sheila, I don't have all the answers, I try to keep well informed but there are large subjects such as Christianity, Philosophy and countless others where I don't have much knowledge. Because I am just a rank and file guy with limited knowledge, I really don't think it is my place to say anymore about your disagreement with Maria. What I already said previously has already been said and I now rue that I wrote that post.

I enjoy reading both your posts, Sheila. On your disagreement with Maria, you have both eloquently posted and presented your sides of the disagreement. Both sides of the case are available for all the people who read the thread to view. CO2 and I both wanted the thread to be a big tent where different sides of an issue can be presented freely without a poster being attacked or discredited. The viewers can read both sides and post or not post as they see fit.

Speaking as a person who has made several noteworthy enemies on ESMB who will no longer talk to me or post here, I have come to realize that you can't please everyone. Sometimes two decent and well meaning people just cannot come to an agreement on some major topic, that is just a fact of life!! There is some fundamental difference that makes it impossible for them to find agreement. In such a case, sometimes the best solution is to just cut communications with the other person. Doing that doesn't even mean that you can't respect the other person, wish them well or even love them. You are severing a communication line between you but you can still wish them well and hope they find success.

That's the best advice I can find in my heart to respond to your post. It comes from the heart and I am passing it on in a heartfelt manner.
Lakey
 
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

JustSheila I'm definitely not pleased to meet you. Certainly you may find grammatical errors akin to your own ( of which you erroneously accuse Maria Cuervo of having ) and also may find some further confusion to add to our own laughable comprehension of Christianity ( which you purport to be an expert in ).
I don't have the heart to rip into a questionable intellect so i'll simply send you an indifferent ( although annoyed ) advisement.
Christianity as such is subdivided into many facets and ( horror of horrors ) cults; which is simply a term derived from the concept of 'culture' and understood to be a subdivisional branch of this main core.
Your particular view of the trinity has been a subject of debate ( and many murders ) since the inception of Christianity.
Within this religious parameters you find a myriad beliefs and teachings that change over the centuries up to the point of today's Catholic church approving the controversial teachings of saint Luisa Picarreta's Divine will channeling of Christ's teachings.
These new concepts put the Trinity in a background importance level and enter 'new' concepts including avant garde phsics as explained by Jesus circa 1934 9 (according to the Vatican approved Divine will)and preceding even Einstein's molecular physics discoveries.
That along with the Black sea scrolls and gospels of Enoch and Mary Magdalene and many others are also part of the Christianity that you blatantly denounce, misunderstand and stand in obvious stark ignorance thereof ' these early Christians being mainly gnostics.
So Sheila I suggest you get educated ,to at least a slight degree beyond whatever redneck Sunday school catechism classes you attended, before tackling a University professor that has lowered herself kindly to attempting to educate you.
Shane on you, you are a sham Christian and probably a scilon plant and shoud be ousted from this forum....or 're-declared'.
 
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Maria Cuervo said:
:biggrin:

Gib and others. I will respond better later on the idea of humans fixing each other with spiritual tech. Until I can do so, here is my blog post on that. Maybe nothing or maybe something in the blog post will be of interest. I realize it is an unusual statement that by human means and spiritual technologies I don't believe we can fix ourselves.

http://www.forum.exscn.net/entry.ph...quot-technologies-quot-or-quot-knowledge-quot
Click to expand...

My post was based upon having read your link prior to my post.

In other words, I read it, the link, then posted.

I'm not being argumentative, just wanting discussion.
 
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

JustSheila said:
Hi Lakey,

This part of the discussion was good and a nice break from the disagreement between Maria and I. I doubt anyone was offended by what you said - I certainly was not. It would have been nice if you nudged her to simply answer the questions - Does she believe in Jesus as Saviour and Messiah? Does she believe in a Trinity? If not, by definition, she's not a Christian - a religion which she states she "decided to join" on her blog post. Pronouncing a belief in the general concept of love is not enough to share a group's religious beliefs that set it apart from other groups. That's irrational.

So you know, this is a carryover from when Maria arrogantly bashed the Christian concept of God on another thread. I was floored to see her calling herself a Christian on this thread and her blog post afterward. If she claimed any other religion, it wouldn't matter. Of course other religions don't view it the same way, that's why they are different religions.

But I tire of Maria's rhetoric. It smacks of Scientology. Everything from the vast, broad claims of having superior knowledge to others when she knows little of the religions she purports to know, to the inability to admit when she is mistaken, to the lashing out and attacking, accusing and blaming anyone who would disagree with her to the victimish positioning when someone comes along who does have more knowledge on that particular subject. Then there is the stealthy steering around a subject or question and the efforts to avoid same and the redefining of words or terms beyond their actual use in the original quote. Leon often posts and debates in this circular fashion, too, but at least he is upfront and honest about his beliefs. Top it all off with Maria's demonstrated lack of education on basic grammar despite claimed superior education, her repeated denial of actual quoted statements made - I just don't find anything she claims or says about herself to be reliable or trustworthy.

Of note is also the fact that she has sent an enormous number of PMs to many different ESMB members to personally promote herself to them since she arrived just less than four weeks ago.

I don't regret pointing that out to others, either. Is she really gone for the weekend, as she said? It appears not.

However, I regret and apologise for this happening on your thread, which has always been a good place for discussions on different topics. Sorry, Lakey. I will not engage Maria anymore here, Lakey, and wish you and others here a good day. :hug:
Click to expand...

Of course the question for ex-scn christians is:why is xenu less believable than zombie jesus? Why is xenu less believable than moses? Why is Marcabia less believable than Eden? And the same type of questions apply to all other religions. When you understand why you don't believe in xenu or zeus or apollo or thor or allah or beelzebub then you will understand why I don't believe in your god either.
 
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

SPsince83 said:
Of course the question for ex-scn christians is:why is xenu less believable than zombie jesus? Why is xenu less believable than moses? Why is Marcabia less believable than Eden? And the same type of questions apply to all other religions. When you understand why you don't believe in xenu or zeus or apollo or thor or allah or beelzebub then you will understand why I don't believe in your god either.
Click to expand...

:confused2: I was answering questions Lakey asked about Christianity. To answer Xenu wouldn't have made any sense.
 
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

SPsince83 said:
Of course the question for ex-scn christians is:why is xenu less believable than zombie jesus? Why is xenu less believable than moses? Why is Marcabia less believable than Eden? And the same type of questions apply to all other religions. When you understand why you don't believe in xenu or zeus or apollo or thor or allah or beelzebub then you will understand why I don't believe in your god either.
Click to expand...

Moses seems totally believable, not in the same class as the other names you have mentioned. He lived only a few thousand years ago, was a mortal with no extraordinary superpowers and he led the Jewish people, a group of only several thousand people, from Egypt to the holy land, a distance of only a few hundred miles. He is much more believable than Xenu just by virtue of the numbers. Xenu was a galactic warlord who ruled over 76 planets in a star system 9 light years from Earth. To solve their overpopulation, instead of promoting birth control the way Chinese did or distributing condoms and birth control pills to the populace, he called up Douglas Aircraft of Arcturus and ordered a vast fleet of DC 3's to take all these trillions of people to Earth, place them in volcanos and then blow them up with A Bombs. It's a tough call to make but I believe the story of Moses has more chance of being true than the story of Xenu.

I think I might know who you are. There was someone who posted on ESMB about 3 years ago with the screen name of Clarence Rockaway. That individual was declared suppressive in 1983, as I recall, and that person also did not speak very highly of Christianity and spoke very disparagingly about Jesus. I devoted the first 44 years of my life to trying to help that person find happiness, in fact we had the same parents and grew up in the same house and both share the same last name. I think you and Clarence Rockaway are the same person. Just guessing but you two, or is it only one, sure have the same writing style and the same hate for certain religions. Peace to you, whether you be Clarence or somebody else.
Lakey
 
Last edited:
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Oh, I don't think he's Clarence. Very different posting style. SPSINCE83 is polite and even apologizes when he feels things are going sideways.

Funnily, I have been thinking of Clarence lately. Makes me wonder, since, when something comes up out of the blue for me, it generally means I'm sensing A Disturbance In The Force...
 
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Having just been aquainted with the reconstruction of
Bruckners symphony 9 fourth movement another seemingly
miracle arises. Sketches of Sibelius 8th symphony, with
some 800 pages of music. Its not clear what exactly they
are as yet. Here these sketches are played. The first is
extrordinary.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmIGn97BXs8
 
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Claire Swazey said:
Oh, I don't think he's Clarence. Very different posting style. SPSINCE83 is polite and even apologizes when he feels things are going sideways.

Funnily, I have been thinking of Clarence lately. Makes me wonder, since, when something comes up out of the blue for me, it generally means I'm sensing A Disturbance In The Force...
Click to expand...

You're probably right, I've checked out a couple other of SPS's post on other thread's and they don't resemble Clarence's, only the one on this thread does. Don't worry about a Disturbance in the Force unless is was extremely recent. My friend Purple Haze went to visit Clarence at his house about 6 -8 months ago. He is healthy and in good spirits. Some friends of his bought him a nice condo many years ago and he lives there and he was able to get government welfare checks coming in and at 3 years younger than me, he may get social security checks as well. He didn't really work much in his life time except for at CCLA and the Denver Org but he worked at least 5 years in my company and did bell hop work for a few years so he probably got enough work in to qualify for Social Security, although his check would end up being pretty small. He was in good health and good spirits when Purple Haze visited him. His only mention of me was to ask her not to mention my name because when he is reminded of me he gets extremely agitated and upset.
Lakey
 
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Jose ( not really ) Marti said:
JustSheila I'm definitely not pleased to meet you. Certainly you may find grammatical errors akin to your own ( of which you erroneously accuse Maria Cuervo of having ) and also may find some further confusion to add to our own laughable comprehension of Christianity ( which you purport to be an expert in ).
I don't have the heart to rip into a questionable intellect so i'll simply send you an indifferent ( although annoyed ) advisement.
Christianity as such is subdivided into many facets and ( horror of horrors ) cults; which is simply a term derived from the concept of 'culture' and understood to be a subdivisional branch of this main core.
Your particular view of the trinity has been a subject of debate ( and many murders ) since the inception of Christianity.
Within this religious parameters you find a myriad beliefs and teachings that change over the centuries up to the point of today's Catholic church approving the controversial teachings of saint Luisa Picarreta's Divine will channeling of Christ's teachings.
These new concepts put the Trinity in a background importance level and enter 'new' concepts including avant garde phsics as explained by Jesus circa 1934 9 (according to the Vatican approved Divine will)and preceding even Einstein's molecular physics discoveries.
That along with the Black sea scrolls and gospels of Enoch and Mary Magdalene and many others are also part of the Christianity that you blatantly denounce, misunderstand and stand in obvious stark ignorance thereof ' these early Christians being mainly gnostics.
So Sheila I suggest you get educated ,to at least a slight degree beyond whatever redneck Sunday school catechism classes you attended, before tackling a University professor that has lowered herself kindly to attempting to educate you.
Shane on you, you are a sham Christian and probably a scilon plant and shoud be ousted from this forum....or 're-declared'.
Click to expand...

Jose,

For some reason, two very good decent ESMB ladies weren't getting along. And I get that there was some real anger. But, stuff like that doesn't mean someone's not Christian. Christians are like anyone else. They have emotions.

However the posts may strike you, suggesting a new declare or that someone be ousted is just adding fuel to the fire.
 
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

JustSheila said:
<snip>
So there is no such thing as someone who is both a Christian and Agnostic.
<snip>
Sheila
Click to expand...

Uh, pardon me . . . . . am I a no such thing ? :)

Oh, boy . . . . " Christian" is sort of hard to define. Are we talking snake handlers or Baptist or Unity or Mormon ? All those & many more - like TV evanglists - fly under a very very wide net called Christianity.

My sister attended a Unity Church where they only played show tunes. The minister was openly a lesbian. My other sister went to Unity Church and some of the ladies liked under a full moon to dance naked.

My cousin that is an Ordained Presbyterian Minister sort of " Hmmm" about that.

My sort of uncle left the Catholic Priesthood to marry my aunt.

As a kid when I was a Methodist we thought the Baptists were going to hell - they thought the same of us.

A Baptist Church person - in church - recently told my adult son he was going to hell because he had tattoos & God hated Tattoos !

The church I attend believes only church hymns should be sung/ played in church. Yet most welcome to all : tats, LGBT, all ages, all races - only thing I've heard is the minister doesn't care for shorts & flip flops at the service ( 2 people wore shorts & flip flops today - somebody does every Sunday - LOL ! )

So, I really can't define " Christian " past what I happen to believe ( which has NO bearing on what anybody else does or doesn't believe )

Define " God ". Well, I hear a lot of people try to define " God" in a box of their own human understanding.
Is it the same as universal intelligence ?
Cosmic Divinity ?
Supreme Being ?
Same as Allah ?

( I'm not in the old white guy with a beard camp - nor am in the Old Testament God of wrath & vengence ).

Anyway, I do believe in MY understanding of " Christian "

( I'm not in favor of using the " Bible " to make others wrong by way of pick & choose verses : Homosexuals are an abomination to the Lord & they are going to Hell says somebody as they munch on lobster )

( But, I do not think all the " Bible" is the " Word of God " either )

I also believe in the " God " that fits my definition.

( I do know my God loves all His creations & any God that shuns his creations is not my God )

Agnostic ?

Well, It doesn't make a rip to me whether or not there is a " God " or " Gods ".

I think that qualifies me as agnostic, right ?

I go to a christian church every Sunday - have for years . Friends with minister & board of directors & all that.

Damn if I don't think I am, by definition, am both Christian & an agnostic.

No, I don't do communion - but they don't do that where I go.

Do I believe that my concept of God come through me & shines a light ? Yes. But, I'm OK if he doesn't.

Given I believe we are all eternal beings I don't see whether or not there is or is not a God really matters.

Does my church try to teach good behavior to children ? I think so.

Does my church try to help those in need ? When they can, yes.

Now, does it matter if anyone agrees with me or not ? NO.



added :

PS - It just might be that ALL religions are based on explanations of ancient visitations by alien life forms from outer space. ( I don't care ) The first illegal aliens ? LOL !
 
Last edited:
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Thanks, Gizmo.

I'm going to think about your post for a bit. Thanks for helping me look at things a different way. :hug:
 
Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Claire Swazey said:
Jose,

For some reason, two very good decent ESMB ladies weren't getting along. And I get that there was some real anger. But, stuff like that doesn't mean someone's not Christian. Christians are like anyone else. They have emotions.

However the posts may strike you, suggesting a new declare or that someone be ousted is just adding fuel to the fire.
Click to expand...
Actually that is not what occurred. from this end it was clear I was viciously attacked.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top