343
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 60:
Line 60: + + + + + + +
Fox News
:::::From what I recall during my days over to a-r-s Xenu was OT-III material, revealed only after the mark has (donated) spent thousands of dollars. It was in evidence during a trial of one guy named "Fischmann". Sometime between the occurrence of the trial and CoS's attorneys asking the documents be sealed, an enterprising person copied them and distributed them far and wide. Once the order to seal was set ALL these copies were illegal but somehow they managed to get onto the internet. The upshot is that though Xenu is widely known the actual documents are still copyrighted and not allowed to be seen in toto. But, as Groucho Marx pointed out "inside a dog, it's too dar to read. [[User:Cracker|Cracker]]<sup>[[User_Talk:Cracker|talk]]</sup> 11:22, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
:::::From what I recall during my days over to a-r-s Xenu was OT-III material, revealed only after the mark has (donated) spent thousands of dollars. It was in evidence during a trial of one guy named "Fischmann". Sometime between the occurrence of the trial and CoS's attorneys asking the documents be sealed, an enterprising person copied them and distributed them far and wide. Once the order to seal was set ALL these copies were illegal but somehow they managed to get onto the internet. The upshot is that though Xenu is widely known the actual documents are still copyrighted and not allowed to be seen in toto. But, as Groucho Marx pointed out "inside a dog, it's too dar to read. [[User:Cracker|Cracker]]<sup>[[User_Talk:Cracker|talk]]</sup> 11:22, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
== Fox News ==
Father Jonathan of Fox News has written for Fox News about Scientology. [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,253401,00.html here]. He then posted some of the comments he received [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,254198,00.html here]. There are at least two points that can be observed:
* A clean, easily read article is widely read.
* Readers will remind you of controversy even if you don't include it.<br />
Let us err on the side of conservatism rather on the side of rumor-mongering. If our article is viewed with respect as Father Jonathan's seems to be, instead of the reactions to groupthink found at Wikipedia, we will have accomplished a great deal. [[User:Terryeo|Terryeo]] 12:17, 19 March 2007 (EDT)