From: s0xjg@exnet.co.uk (Xavier Gallagher)
Newsgroups: alt.astrology
Subject: Re: Xavier's defense of Mr Cern
Date: 11 Oct 92 19:53:05 GMT
Organization: ExNet Systems Ltd Public Access News, London, UK

In article <1992Oct10.065012.5607@tfs.com> ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic) writes:
>s0xjg@exnet.co.uk (Xavier Gallagher) writes:
>>I have just read a great deal of the bile directed at our friend Dave Casper.
>>


>to tell it like I see it.

Didn't I say something somewhere about not having to break people jaws?  But I
accept that you must tell it as you see it.

>
>Insults and venom. True - Mea Culpa. So do you here:
>
>>What a bunch of shits those who joined in the attack are.
>

I think I qualified each statement so that those I really did feel contempt
for knew who they were.
The victims of my bile were those who
1. Knew what Dave had told us.
2. Attacked him with it.

I must say that there was no astrological talent or skill on picking out
his mother as a focus at that time.  After all I had *predicted* a problem
 with the mother.  All who followed and picked on his mother were working
on the information that Dave himself had given out.  They often did not even have the
 sensitivty to treat it well

>So, I feel, has Dave - not so much "you're an asshole", but "you must be
>stupid" sorts of things. So do a lot of people who let their emotions go,
>and respond to attacks real and imagined.


This is no excuse for the behaviour I pinpointed.  If astrology is so hot
for personal devlopment those who practice it should be able to rise above
such  "real or imagined" personal attacks.

>
>>.........................................................  It was in *good
>>faith* that Dave shared it with us and it should have been treated with kid
>>gloves.
>>
>>How dare you bring his mother in to this?
>
>His mother had an influence on his life. I might be wrong, but I'm siding with
>Dave *against* his mother - how hateful that someone who is supposed to love

But you didn't know that, or cannot prove that you had worked out that hisMum
 had treated him badly untill after he posted the information.  He trusted us.

>And the "I'm supposed to guess" theory is down the tubes - if I did that,
>I'd have to stay at home. I will forever be offending someone somewhere -
>and staying at home offends me.
>
>>Those who joined in the attack and who used this information should be ashamed
>>of themselves.  What childish, stupid, thoughtless, petty, viscous behaviour.
>>I do not know about the astrological aptitude of those who posted in the
>> battle and used this information but I do know that they rank on the level
>> of worms when it comes to thoughtfullness.
>
>I would rather be an accurate, thoughtless astrologer than a useless nice one.

So would I mate, so would I.  That is why I harp on about working without
pre knowledge.


>there I have to make a choice - will the ends justify the means? Maybe one
>good jab is all it takes.

Hmmmm.  Well,astrology is great for personal growth and god complexes *as well*
That is a joke :-)  I know what you mean.

>
>>And finaly, for those of you who continue to show a complete lack of
>> imagination ,ie those who keep asking "Why does he read this if he does not
>>believe in it",  I present an answer.
>>
>>Because he would like to.
>
>Then let him READ, Xavier. He is also WRITING. How many dozens of others READ

He reads and he writes.  Dave seems to have one failing, that is he will not
try it out for himself.  I agree with you in full except that he still, no
matter how ignorant has the right to point out what he considers significant
faults in our collective logic.
>
>>I may be wrong about that, I may be right about that, but he has the right to
>>post here and I for one welcome it.
>
>Well, I'd suggest putting the arguments into a consistently named thread where
>people with killfile capabilities can skip it. If he wants to duke it out,

Now who is the child?  I do not like what I'm hearing so I will stick my
fingures in my ears and shout "I can't hear you!"

>let's put that into a specific place. When he comes into other threads, it'd
>be nice if it were contributory or positive.
>

Hear! Hear!  Did you hear that dave? Try saying "positive" :-)

>Thanks for coming to his defense.

Thank you.  I've enjoyed your response and found it very valuable.
I hope I haven't offended anyone.

Xavier