Posts by Jerry Bergman

2

Latest on Besier

by Jerry Bergman in

jw
friends

note: i have received what purports to be professor gerhard besier's speech that he delivered at the opening of the scientology's cult's "human rights" office in brussels, belgium on september 17. .

see, also my response to scientology's "proclamation on religion, human rights and society.".

http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/writings/armstrong-ltr-2003-09-28-brussels.html.

Jerry Bergman

Scientology Collaborator — Duplicitous or Just a Dupe?
A friend wrote to me and suggested that in my note about the speech that Professor Gerhard Besier is supposed to have given at the opening of the Scientology cult’s “human rights office” in Brussels on September 17, I might want to change the word “scoundrel” to something that doesn’t imply that he’s an “evil criminal.” http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/besier-speech-2003-09-17.html
It was recommended that I refer to Dr. Besier instead as a “Scientology collaborator” or a “totalitarian group supporter,” which, of course, he is.
My big Webster’s Dictionary has a single definition for “scoundrel:” “a bold, selfish man that has very low ethical standards.” The word doesn’t mean “evil criminal,” although certainly evil criminals can be scoundrels, and scoundrels can be evil criminals. But all scoundrels are not evil criminals. In fact, in modern usage, “scoundrel” can be a playful term referring to a prankster or banterer. When I say that Dr. Besier, if he delivered or wrote this speech, is a scoundrel, I am using the meaning provided in my dictionary.
He may not be a scoundrel, because there’s still a chance that he may not have given this speech in Brussels. Since I webbed the speech last week it now is more certain that he did, because multiple reports have been received that this text was handed out at a Scientology press conference following the “grand opening.” http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/besier-speech-2003-09-17.pdf
The Scientology cult that Dr. Besier supports is famous, however, for forging documents and for entrapping people and running covert intelligence operations, so it is still remotely possible that this is a forgery created perhaps simply to lure someone into erroneously criticizing him for a scoundrelly act he didn’t commit.
Because I did not know when I webbed the speech if Dr. Besier had in fact delivered it in Brussels, I included that all important qualifier “IF” in my criticism. I have written to him and asked him IF he gave the speech, but he has so far not responded. Therefore I still do not know with absolute certainty that the speech is his.
IF it really is his speech, Dr. Besier is certainly bold, because it takes astonishing boldness, indeed impudence, for someone who is not a Scientologist to declare that Scientology is battling for “religious freedom,” and that it “leads a fight for tolerance that will benefit everyone.” As the Gerry Armstrong cases demonstrate, not only is Scientology not battling for “religious freedom,” and most assiduously battling to destroy religious freedom, but also virtually every Scientologist is contracted to destroy religious freedom.
IF the speech is Dr. Besier’s, his boldness approaches shamelessness because of his professional relationship to the Hannah Arendt Institute for the Research of Totalitarianism at the Dresden Technical University. If a Director of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, for example, gave a speech in which he portrayed the Nazis as fighters for religious tolerance, that speech and that director would not be that much more shameless.
Scientology’s intolerance and hatred for the class of citizens whom the cult labels “SPs,” is just as opprobrious as the Nazis’ intolerance and hatred for the Jews. Scientology is just as totalitarian in philosophy, policy and practice as the Nazi party. Thankfully, the Scientology cult has not come into political power as the Nazis tragically did. It is extremely bold of Dr. Besier to lend his support and academic position and reputation to the Scientologists as they pursue that kind of power.
The following policy was issued by Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard in 1960, and continues to be the organization’s policy, on which its personnel continue to be trained and drilled:
“The goal of the department is to bring the government and hostile philosophies or societies into a state of complete compliance with the goals of Scientology. This is done by high level ability to control and in its absence by low level ability to overwhelm. Introvert such agencies. Control such agencies. Scientology is the only game on Earth where everybody wins. There is no overt [crime] in bringing good order." HCOPL 15 August 1960 “Department of Government Affairs.” See, also Scientology’s intelligence officer checksheet. http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/osa-int-ed-508r.html
The speech, IF it is Dr. Besier’s, manifests considerable selfishness because of the omission of any mention of “suppressive persons,” or “SPs,” the class of Homo sapiens or wogs®, against whom the Scientology organization really does perpetrate the anti-human rights actions Dr. Besier erroneously implies are being perpetrated against the Scientologists. How selfish to express no words or empathy for the victims of the persecutors he praises as religious freedom fighters. The opening of Scientology’s “human rights office” was a perfect opportunity to say something on behalf of a truly suppressed minority, the SPs, and he said, IF he said what it’s said he said, nothing!
Scientology, of course, is organized by policies that make the cult selfish in the extreme. It is highly money-motivated, extorts labor and huge sums with threats, scams massive amounts with demonstrably false promises, terrorizes its perceived competitors, tries to crush anyone who distributes its “scriptures,” and seeks an absolute monopoly for its brand of “religion.” Dr. Besier’s speech, IF it is his, supports this consummately selfish cult by misidentifying its selfishness as a fight for tolerance, and consequently mispaints his own motivation for his support as philanthropic.
As an “academic,” and especially as a representative of the Hannah Arendt Institute, Dr. Besier must hold to, and be held to, a higher ethical standard than a non-academic who does not represent such an institution. IF he delivered this speech, and if in his “research” he simply missed the fact that Scientology is a notorious abuser of human rights, then Dr. Besier demonstrates a very low level of academic ethics. IF he delivered the speech, and was aware of the cult’s human rights abuse and intolerance of counter or other views, then he displayed an abysmal level of ethics. IF Dr. Besier delivered the speech that is being ascribed to him, and if he were paid for it, or for his presence at the grand opening of the Scientology’s “human rights office,” the ethics of his “research” and his overlooking of the cult’s actual nature, intentions and practices make much more sense.
It may be that Dr. Besier, IF he wrote that speech, does not grasp what it is like to be declared an “SP” by Scientology and made a target of its infamous and widely condemned “fair game” policy. See, e.g., http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/cult/sp/pl-penalties-for-lower-conds.html
Perhaps he has never heard from one of the cult’s victims, whose human rights the Scientologists have tried to suppress and destroy using the courts and through extra-judicial assaults, threats and other criminal acts. This then is a wonderful opportunity for Dr. Besier to hear from one such Scientology target and victim, and to undertake a study of the cult’s “suppressive person doctrine” in his research. Scientology’s SPs are a suppressed minority with a great need for a voice like his to speak in their defense, and for their rights and freedoms.
Although Dr. Besier’s speech, IF he gave it in Brussels, puts him in the unpleasant land of scoundreldom, it is extremely easy for him to escape that state. He need only speak out against Scientology’s abuses and its SP doctrine, and speak up for the SPs. It may very possibly happen that in doing so he would himself be targeted as an SP and fair gamed by the totalitarian cult he had been supporting, and his career, family, relationships and life threatened, or even ruined. But being fair game is surely a better rap than being a scoundrel.
It might be helpful to Dr. Besier to read this college senior thesis entitled "Scientology and Totalitarianism" that uses Hannah Arendt’s writings for comparing Scientology to Nazism and Stalinism, which is webbed on Operation Clambake. http://www.xenu.net/archive/thesis/index.html In fact, it might be helpful for Dr. Besier to read everything at Operation Clambake. www.xenu.net Perhaps it would help to read about my own almost twenty-two years of experiences as an SP and fair game. http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/introduction.html
It might also be helpful to Dr. Besier to consider Dr. Arendt’s messages about movements like Scientology, their front organizations, like Scientology’s “human rights office,” and their supporters, like himself. For example, from her Origins of Totalitarianism:
The world at large, on the other side, usually gets its first glimpse of a totalitarian movement through its front organizations. The sympathizers, who are to all appearances still innocuous fellow-citizens in a nontotalitarian society, can hardly be called single-minded fanatics; through them, the movements make their fantastic lies more generally acceptable, can spread their propaganda in milder, more respectable forms, until the whole atmosphere is poisoned with totalitarian elements which are hardly recognizable as such but appear to be normal political reactions or opinions.
The fellow-traveler organizations surround the totalitarian movements with a mist of normality and respectability that fools the membership about the true character of the outside world as much as it does the outside world about the true character of the movement. The front organization functions both ways: as the facade of the totalitarian movement to the nontotalitarian world, and as the facade of this world to the inner hierarchy of the movement.
Gerry Armstrong
c/o Dialog Zentrum Berlin
Heimat 27
D-14165 Berlin-Zehlendorf
Germany
Tel: +49 (0) 30-8472-3958
Fax: +49 (0) 1212-5-205-27-015
[email protected]

2

Jehovah's Witnesses and Lying

by ozziepost in

in their own words:.

*** w83 3/1 19 "flocking together in battle line" ***.

in carnal warfare it is essential that officers and other personnel have briefing sessions so as to be kept up-to-date on the movements on the battlefield and the latest enemy strategy.

Jerry Bergman

An article on Lying in court and religion can be found at:

http://www.freeminds.org/doctrine/doctrine.htm

9

Book on Ebay re: JW and mental illness

by Freedomrules in

jw
friends

is anyone familiar with this book?

i have noticed many wits have problems with depression and bipolar disorder.

i have a condition known as panic disorder, which is classified as a mental illness, no one else in my family has this condition.

Jerry Bergman

Brummie

Thanks for the complement! I have received hundreds of complements from that tape and it was one factor that motivated me to continue to research this topic!

9

Book on Ebay re: JW and mental illness

by Freedomrules in

jw
friends

is anyone familiar with this book?

i have noticed many wits have problems with depression and bipolar disorder.

i have a condition known as panic disorder, which is classified as a mental illness, no one else in my family has this condition.

Jerry Bergman

I don't know if he is impartial.

Are you impartial about creationism? Hardly, given your statement below!

In fact if he supports "creation science" (oxymoron) his credibility just sliped a couple of hundred % points in my opinion. Anyone who supports "Six day Creation" must be in cookoo land if you ask me.

What is Six Day Creation? A hint: It is very different from Creation Science.

What do you think of the following book review?

Dawkins is always an interesting writer and a favorite of creationists because he is so honest about his feelings. He says what other evolutionists only think and, therefore, creationists love to quote him. Unfortunately, this book was a disappointment. It consisted mostly of reprints from other sources, most all which I have read before. Nonetheless, it had a few gems. Read the following quote taken from page 91 of Dawkin's book. Quote:"I tumbled to the fact that I had been duped into granting an interview to Jews - a thing I normally don't do, for good reasons... My generosity was rewarded in a fashion that anyone familiar with Jewish tactics might have predicted." End of quote. He than related how the Jews tricked him and he will never do another interview with Jews again. Darwinists accept Dawkins words as those of a humane, intelligent scientist, yet certainly would take umbrage at the above quote. Why do they not protest what he actually said, which was exactly as quoted above, except the word Jew was subtitled for the word creationist. Those who condemn bigotry in this case support it against another group because it is unfortunately now socially acceptable in certain circles to hate creationists of all stripes, including those of the ID persuasion. Just read the reviews of creation books on this site.

ID growth

by Jerry Bergman in

jw
friends

i just got back from an id conference and was surprised at the growth in this movement!

below is an article i just noted about my roommate, a retired cornell professor.

it is my conclusion that it will continue to grow.

Jerry Bergman

I just got back from an ID conference and was surprised at the growth in this movement! Below is an article I just noted about my roommate, a retired Cornell professor. It is my conclusion that it will continue to grow.

Progressive Farmer's Man of the Year: John Sanford

Subject: Progressive Farmer's Man of the Year: John Sanford
From: "C. S. Prakash" <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 13:14:56 -0600
Reply-To: Plant Tissue Culture <[email protected]>
Sender: Plant Tissue Culture <[email protected]>

Man of the Year: John Sanford Progressive Farmer, January 2001 http://www.progressivefarmer.com/issue/0101/sanford/default.asp (thanks to HANU PAPPU <[email protected]> for this alert to Agbioview) From a simple BB gun, this scientist fired the shot heard around the world-the promise of biotechnology to feed the hungry. The revolution of agricultural biotechnology came to be through the business end of a Crossman BB gun-a dime-store toy wielded by many a rambunctious youth. This is the pistol that powered the first gene gun, a low-tech, "laughable" idea, mocked in the scientific community. It will never work, they said. But it did. And it transformed agriculture in a way no one understands. From an idea of Cornell University scientist John Sanford, the world now has corn and cotton that kill insect pests, plants that are resistant to herbicides, a rice resistant to insects (from the genes of potatoes) and tolerant of salt and drought (genes from barley). The gene gun was used to create a virus-resistant fruit that will save Hawaii's $45-million-a-year papaya crop from a viral killer. In less developed countries, the technology Sanford pioneered is embraced as a miracle, perhaps a real way to beat chronic crop failures and hunger. Also evolving from his BB gun is a hand-held gene gun for use on humans and animals that shoots genetic vaccines directly into the skin. The vaccines, says Sanford friend and University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center researcher Stephen Johnston, are safer than today's vaccines and produce "whopping" immune responses. It is because so much human good has come from the barrel of an air pistol that Progressive Farmer is honored to elect John Sanford its 2001 Man of the Year in Service to Agriculture. Agriculture's newest production revolution began in the fall of 1983 when Sanford was waging an aggravating backyard battle with plundering squirrels. So it was BBs Sanford had on his mind when Cornell University electrical engineer Ed Wolf asked him this question: Exactly what speed is needed to force bits of genetic material through the fragile, semipermeable walls of plant cells? Wolf and Sanford had done some hard thinking about Sanford's ideas for moving genetic material into living plant cells, and had come upon the notion of "shooting" it in. But what about that speed? Wolf wondered. Sanford thought for a moment. "About the speed of a BB," he said. Wolf looked over his array of electromagnetic accelerators and ion beams. The less-than-blazing speed of a BB can be achieved with much less sophistication he thought. Wolf came across the right tool on a cluttered shelf in Fay's Drug Store near the Cornell campus-a Crossman air pistol. Christmas break 1983 brought together Sanford, Wolf and Nelson Allen (the head machinist in Wolf's lab who modified the BB gun and, later, vastly improved versions of it) for the first tests of this low-tech but elegant tool for moving genetic material. Into a hole drilled in the barrel of the gun, the three poured bits of powdered tungsten. The target was a whole onion, which Sanford chose for its large cells. The first blasts of air were so violent that bits of onion splattered back onto the researchers, donning the customary white gowns, booties and hats of ultra-clean laboratories. As the roomed filled with the pungent smell of splattered onion, Sanford made adjustments and soon had tungsten hitting the bull's-eye-the insides of onion cells. Sanford took what Allen and Wolf jokingly called the macroparticle accelerator back to his lab. There he soon proved the cells survived the shots of tungsten and that DNA could be delivered into the cells on these particles. He soon realized bursts of air from air guns where too uncontrollable-too close and the cells were blasted apart; too far away and the particles failed to penetrate. So in the spirit of Tim Allen's TV character Tim the Toolman, he added more power. Sanford brought into the employ of the fragile craft of plant biotechnology .22-caliber blanks (the kind used in nail guns). The blanks powered a plunger that ran into a stopping plate that was pierced with a small hole. The tip of the plunger was treated with DNA-covered bits of tungsten. When fired, the rod shot forward, striking the stopping plate. The DNA-coated tungsten flew forward through the hole into the target cells. That's the theory. In practice, it fell to a sometimes powder-burned Ted Klein, a young researcher now working at DuPont, to fire the gun and dodge bits of high-velocity debris. Klein soon began tying a length of string to the trigger and leaving the room before firing the gun. Researchers on the second floor of Cornell's Hedrick Hall never did get used to the sporadic gunfire coming coming from Sanford's lab. And neither did the cells. They often died from the effect of blast and gunpowder. But Sanford and Klein slowly improved their techniques. Klein's work eventually led to the first successful biolistic transformations of plants. By 1986, with improvements in the gun-today's gene guns are most likely powered by gas, such as helium-Sanford's lab, in collaboration with Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc., produced the first transformation of corn. Sanford and Klein's gun shattered the biotech bottleneck. Researchers knew what some genes did and even how to get some inside plants, but the gun made the process faster, more reliable and less expensive. Plus it worked in a wide variety of applications. From that work, Sanford has moved on. After selling the rights to his gene gun to DuPont and selling Sanford Scientific, a company he founded, a financially-secure Sanford opened the doors to his Feed My Sheep Institute in Waterloo, N.Y. A deeply religious man, Sanford hoped to transfer for free the benefits of plant genetic engineering to Third World nations. Although his intentions were honorable, the real-world costs were too high. So Sanford has mothballed Feed My Sheep. Today, he works some on his own human gene gun, but more often he is engaged in what he calls the field of Christian spiritual nutrition. He won't say much about it, except that his work takes on some of the rougher edges of TV of the Internet. With regard to some of today's biotechnology controversies-particularly charges about Aventis' StarLink seed potentially causing allergic reactions in humans-Sanford admits some confusion. He points out that the proteins of dispute are very similar to ones that, for decades, have been an important tool in organic farming. What's more, he says, "We're exposed to tens or hundreds of thousands of proteins in a normal diet. There are a bewildering array of potential allergens. They have never been regulated. But now there seems to be [a movement to] arbitrarily and artificially raise barriers [to their advanced use]." He finds today's loud and angry biotech debate a bit ironic. As a student in the 1970s, Sanford remembers his alarm at the prospect of mass starvation. The thought of the "population bomb" drew him into the field of plant breeding. And with the fruits of his labor, Sanford has helped bring the promise of genetic engineering to all who must eat to live.

7

What happend to Covington

by hippikon in

jw
friends

what happend to covington.

i understand he left to org after being told he couldnt be on the gb because he wasn't anointed.

i'dd like to get some confirmation on that if anyone knows.. .

Jerry Bergman

He told me that he was of the anointed!

He also claims that Knorr was not accurate about this claim.

1

Hayden Covington's Family

by Jerry Bergman in

jw
friends

i am trying to get a hold of anyone who knew hayden covington.

his wife and daughter are still alive.

does anyone know how to contact them???

Jerry Bergman

I am trying to get a hold of anyone who knew Hayden Covington. His wife and daughter are still alive. Does anyone know how to contact them??? She, I am told is now a lawyer. Please help!!! Thanks

54

My response to Gerhard Besier

by Jerry Bergman in

all creationists liars?

response

to professor dr. dr. gerhard besier

Jerry Bergman

A friend at Besier's university did some research and gave the following advice to me:

- Professor Besier is someone no one has heard of. Don't honor him with
attention, he's not worth the trouble.

- The whole Univ. of theology and biology faculties would back him up in
any conflict. Evolutionism = rationalism there, and some big name biology
profs. there are foaming mouth anti-creationists.

- You'll never get a fair hearing in any court here. Americans are viewed
as self-rightous religious quirks who e.g. attacked Irag in the name of oil
and justify it with pious words.

- Put a good reply on the web and make sure it gets distributed. Don't
appear defensive. Come across as "sad" at how German theologians with no
message anymore are self-destructing. Ask Besier or others to reply and
inform the reader with an essay with document just how well attended the
state churches are with university students in the Heidelberg area (answer:
a couple of music students practicing the organ, that is it). Point out
that the FEGs (Frei evangelische Gemeinde) are thriving in spite of and
independent of the theological faculties, and with no state funds.

Point out that as a non-scientist he has no qualifications to attack a
natural scientist like you. There is a huge difference here in status
between a natural scientist (chemistry, physics..) and a social
scientist/theologian.

I don't see any realistic way to get a fair shake in his home turf, but you
can damage and shame him badly by bringing the facts to light.

I have had good experience with our "enemies" once some trust has been
gained. This in the approach which works here. In the USA we try to keep
the Believer firm. In Germany we have long since lost this position, and
are fighting "in the underground", within the system

Hope this helps.

229

JW scientist banned from Institute's WebSite because of Creationistic Views

by GermanXJW in

jw
friends

recently, dr. wolf-ekkehard loennig, a jw working in a leading position at the gene-science-department at the max-planck-institute, has been banned from the institute's website for spreading his view about evolution.

he promotes the so called "intelligents design".

max-planck-institute calles this creationism in disguise.

Jerry Bergman

The latest estimate:

Riken finds bigger gap in chimpanzee, human genes Wednesday, July 2, 2003 at 08:30 JST

TOKYO — Researchers at the Institute of Physical and Chemical Research
(Riken) said Tuesday they have found a much larger difference in the genes
between humans and chimpanzees than the conventionally accepted level.

They say the difference, based on a yet-to-be-completed genome study of the
primate most closely related to humans, is roughly 15%. Yoshiyuki Sakaki,
director of the Riken genome project who announced the results, said the
extent of the difference was greater than previously thought. (Kyodo News)

<A HREF="http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=news&cat=4&id=265043">
http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=news&cat=4&id=265043</A>

Note: I have received what purports to be Professor Gerhard Besier's speech that he delivered at the opening of the Scientology's cult's "Human Rights" office in Brussels, Belgium on September 17. See, also my response to Scientology's "Proclamation on Religion, Human Rights and Society." http://www.gerryarmstrong.org/50grand/writings/armstrong-ltr-2003-09-28-brussels.html If this speech was written by Besier, it is shocking and disgusting in the ignorance or complicity it exhibits. Since some of the language appears to be Scientology's own phraseology, it may very well have been written by the cult, and given to Besier as a dupe or stooge just to read. What a load of lies! What a betrayal of the real oppressed and harassed minority, the victims of the criminal Scientology cult's hateful "suppressive person doctrine." If Besier really wrote and spoke this, he is a willful scoundrel. If he didn't write it, but only mouthed it for his Scientology cult writers, with or without pay, he is only a stupid scoundrel. So, if anyone can confirm that this is indeed the speech he delivered at the opening of the cult's "new and very impressive office," I would be very grateful. I would not want to misidentify this man as a scoundrel if these are not the words he spoke. Gerry Armstrong
	PROFESSOR GERHARD BESIER DRESDEN TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY It gives me considerable pleasure to speak here today on the occasion of the opening of a new and very impressive office for the Church of Scientology International. There is a battle waging for freedom of belief and worship. It is occurring in Germany and across Europe, where the gap between the legally-guaranteed freedom of belief and the day-to-day realities of religious discrimination often collide. The issue comes down to this: Is Germany -- indeed all of Europe -- to be a society where the rights of all faiths are truly respected? The constitutions of individual nations say yes. European law says yes. They all include, as cornerstones, the right to freedom of belief. Yet in practice, members of religious minorities experience discrimination and harassment. Germany is not the only place this happens. It is occurring in enlightened countries all over Europe. And lest members of any traditional faiths present today think I am excluding you, I am not. In European countries where your faiths are in the minority, you, too, could experience similar treatment. The message of the need for tolerance and pluralism applies to you, too. Making circumstances worse is the lack of a universally accepted definition of religion, broad enough to encompass all faiths. Today, a growing community of scholars such as from Oxford and Paris II Universities recognize that the evidence is clear: new religious movements must be accepted as an important part of our spiritual landscape -- and that the narrow definitions of yesteryear must give way to the religious pluralism shaping the Europe of tomorrow. Therefore I take real pleasure in being able to study this definitional problem from the perspective of the Scientology religion, along with several of my colleagues. Of all the new religious movements in Germany, Scientology is by far the most visible and has stood tall against many attacks. The battle is not yet over. But so far, the Church of Scientology has won some notable and precedent-setting legal victories in the courts. Time and again the courts have declared that Scientology is a religious community protected by the German Constitution. The Federal Supreme Labor Court has ruled that the staff members of Scientology churches are motivated by an idealistic commitment and not monetary gain. And this year the courts compelled the German Federal Finance Ministry to recognize that the mother church, Church of Scientology International, is a charitable tax-exempt religious organization. The tide of the battle for religious freedom in Germany is turning. The Church of Scientology stands in the front row of those who fight for the acceptance of religious pluralism. Scientologists don't give up. They are determined. They persist. They show courage in the face of obstacles. I am convinced, only a sincere belief in their religion can produce this level of commitment and dedication. And that is why the Church of Scientology leads a fight for tolerance that will benefit everyone. And their example gives hope to others. Thank you very much.
	This document in .pdf format [German]