"

My point exactly!!  

berlet is adding extensive unsourced original research

Cberlet is adding extensive orginal research and wildly POV assertions regarding his 20 year old claims that simply are not borne out by the references. All assertions to the effect that ""Berlet subsequently found out the evil cultists were lying"" that are not references are simply self serving original research and are being removed unless berlet can find a reference to support the claim. As well, the angry POV tone of Berlet's edits are being removed, and I suggest cberlet not use an encyclopedia entry as a vehicle for angry OR POV statements.

As to the response from Newman's organization to ""Clouds Blur the Rainbow, Berlet himself in the discussion above says:
There are many publications from the (BLP issue deleted [ie, ""Newmanites""]) that have criticized ""Clouds Blur the Rainbow."" An NPOV entry will include criticisms from ""Clouds Blur the Rainbow,"" and then criticisms of the criticism in ""Clouds"" from the various (BLP issue deleted [ie, ""Newmanites""]) publications.
But when the response was added, he and King keep deleting it, claiming it is ""gossip"", while adding three paragrpah from a gossipy letter to the editor from 20 years ago, which is considered ""research""!!. Come on now fellas.  "