This site is best viewed using a highly standards-compliant browser
Whew! Barbara Georgius asks, "Why wouldn't the Clearwater Sun want both sides of the story?" (She was referring to the Gerald Armstrong vs Scientology trial.) "The public can smell prejudice a mile off," she said in a letter to the Sun, and believe me, it's offensive to many, because they expect 'professionalism' from their local reporter and paper.
Now, now, Miss Georgius, you must have been reading another newspaper. It couldn't have been the Clearwater Sun. One-sided reporting? Sensational reporting? That is not in the Sun.
In talking about Armstrong's "allegedly stolen documents," and saying "this is theft in the eyes of the law," let's let the court decide. This is Los Angeles Superior Court Judge G. Breckenridge's decision:
"Gerald Armstrong—who was personally authorized by Hubbard in 1980 to collect documents in preparation for a Hubbard biography—took materials to 'minimize potential risks he faced' after leaving the sect, 'including physical harm.'
"The organization (Scientology) clearly is schizophrenic and paranoid and this bizarre combination seems to be a reflection of its founder, LRH (Hubbard). The evidence portrays (Hubbard) as a man who was virtually a pathological liar when it comes to history, background and achievements."
Breckenridge said the documents, letters, orders and tape recordings "reflect on (Hubbard's) egoism, avarice, lust for power, greed and vindictiveness against all persons perceived by him to be hostile." Now, Miss Georgius, it may be well for you to re-read the editorials and articles by the editors and staff writers of the Sun. You may get a clearer, unbiased opinion and not "smell prejudice" in them.
RUTH W. SLEMP