Ashton, sorry you took umbrage at my post. I was not endorsing Morehouse's points of view. My primary motivation in posting them was to elicit your comments. Thank you for those.

I had no idea I was acting as a water carrier. I guess that means I won't be getting paid. And thanks for likening me to someone else. I take that as a sign to stay out of your threads in the future.

No umbrage taken, Michael. I've always valued your input, and not for a moment do I think you posted Morehouse's apologetic as an endorsement.

You aren't the target of my ire; the creators of these pre-packaged lies are.

But then there comes the matter of individual responsibility. And that's where they have the upper hand in the game. Which brings me to your next paragraph.





Well, the "water carrier" allusion may be rightfully considered as hyperbole on an arc reaching all the way up (or down, depending on one's viewpoint) to Original Sin by anyone who knows you and your posting record and your fundamental views.

On the other hand, taken in a vacuum by some pilgrim wandering this way for the first time, your post could not possibly appear as anything but an endorsement. And the only point I am trying to make, however unkindly, is that without just such grass-roots propagation, the lies would dribble down their chins.

We do become the "water carriers" every time we do their work for them by propagating their lies without documenting the truth.

I appreciate your wanting to "elicit my comments," but, frankly, I don't need anybody generating more work for me. And if I hadn't called attention to at least a few of the blatant falsehoods in what you posted, who would have? Would you? Why aren't you documenting the lies by documenting the truth yourself as you post it? Why leave it to me? You have access to the same information sources that I have access to.



Welllllll...

Okay.

Maybe that was a little over the top.

(But it got your attention, dinnit?)

Ashton

Last I heard Ashton had stomped off the forum in a huff -- although he may be back now. Dunno.

Ashton and I clashed on this subject, so the following is obviously one-sided (as caveats go that is).

I maintain what I believe to be common sense, namely that L Ron Hubbard got his knowledge of "higher conscious knowledge" from his occult studies and purloined this as his own discovery. I don't buy into the argument (assuming I have the argument correct in the first place) that he stumbled upon it either accidentally or miraculously.

Not a chance in hell that ever happened, imo.

Sadly, to my mind, Ashton has left the Forum and [I doubt] will be back. He's not even been seen 'lurking'. He has a book to be out on Watergate any day now and it will likely get into the 'details' on much of this. Personally, I'm skeptical about 'RV' being a viable technique - but open to being proven wrong. I will agree with most here that intelligence communities, including CIA, have had intense interest in it - how better to spy without detection, after all. By the way, Ashton, last I looked, was posting on his publisher's Forum.