“Boortz spends 75% of the article refuting a non-point about CATS. It makes no difference to the debate. “
I think it does makea difference. An attempt to associate anything with Scientology is a smear tactic, since most of America thinks Scientologists are a bunch of loons.
Why else do you suppose Bartlett included it, if he himself didn’t think it would be important to people ?
I think it does makea difference. An attempt to associate anything with Scientology is a smear tactic, since most of America thinks Scientologists are a bunch of loons. Why else do you suppose Bartlett included it, if he himself didn’t think it would be important to people ?BTW, the AFFT's Director of Research, Karen Walby, is a Scientologist. I don't if that really means anything (although Scientologists are known for spreading truth and she is Director of Research for an organization known for stretching the truth).