Volume 2, Issue 7, page 18
rot an ideal solution, tone-wise,
but it at least would show that some
of us have scme spunk left; and it
is becoming more apparent with the
passage of each month that the NASI
has plunged to a depth where impact
is the only understood ccmmunacaticn. I hope you wont take this
latest attack lying down...
"This latest mimeographed Ability
is the most sywptcrratic of insanity
I have seen so far...Were I a psychiatrist, I couldn't help noticing
the constant and repeated expression
of a feeling of persecution, coupled
with delusions cf grandeur... You
take it frcm there. It's on almost
every page. Not quite at the top of
the Responsibility col':mn, is it?
"No, from the looks of it, the
]liSI is slipping fast, and is grabbing at straws. I'm sorry to see it
ha pen, but perhaps in the interest
of- the good and valuable things in
Scientology, it's all for the best.
There are enough of us for a salvage
operation." -- J.R.S., Portland, Ore.
"Neither the defunct Scientology<
Journal, Certainty agazine ](ma
they rest in pieces) nor the past
issues of Ability magazine combined
contain as much unadulterated nauseating garbage as found in Issue
h14 of Abel ity.
"Pages 5 & 6 of Issue 14 contain
invectives calculated by insinuation
to further widen the breech, by allegations so constructed that by its
very printing (giving it space), it
certainly doesn't do good for either
NASI or Hubbard.
"The vague reference to a 'person
or persons unknown' feeding insanit
producing drugs, especially that
tidbit of the psychiatrist of 'russian origin' is undoubtedly without
peer of anything written by PASI or
"Careful whom you shake hands
with men, might not be a'recognized'
Scientologist. Can THIS be Dianetics or Scientology?
"Now to something more cheerful.
Enclosed find check for three new
subscriptions to the Aberree." -- Jason Sebastian, Los Angeles, Calif.
"First I read your editorials,
then I read the letter section, then
I read as much Friedman as I can
stand at one sitting, and later I
may get to your 88'ers. They always
put in a lot of what we already know
and then introduce some variation
out of their own personal blindspot,
carefully phrased to be undetectable
unless you are payiig close attention. E.G.: all this about whether
or not a 'Thetas' is a separate entity. Foo. It's not the word that
counts, it's what the word means. We
all knew that one of the things a
circuit -- if you will allow this archaism -- anything else you want to
call it will still apply to the same
rose & thorns