Hey Webmasters! New Photo Album Service Launched - Check it out!
|
|
|
OML Archives-
Subject: Re: Response - Thu, 7 Mar 1996 22:59:34 -0500
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 22:59:34 -0500
From: "Jim Martin" <flatland@mail.mcn.org>
Message-Id: <199603080337.TAA22441@mail.mcn.org>
To: orgonomy@jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU
Subject: Re: Response
Sender: owner-orgonomy@jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU
A few days ago, Jammerling Ogg wrote:
>
> Michael,
> I just want to let you know that although I don't feel like airing more on
> DeMeo on OML due to the harsh letters I receive from his small group of
> associates, I will express the following from me personally. I do agree
> that several parts are insulting to the readers as you had noted. He also
> did address many areas of unsubstantiated claims very well. In the area
> that I addressed, which was OROP Israel, I was dumb founded to see his
> opinion that the operation was justified even if it caused damage because
> if he didn't do the OROP then more damage would occur by not doing it. It
> may be true that more damage may have occurred from drought but who gives a
> person the authority to make that decision. And to really beat all he then
> indirectly takes credit for the peace talks success because he says if the
> water shortage hadn't been solved then the peace talks would of failed.
> There is much more that can be said about DeMeo's rebuttal but I personally
> do not feel inclined to deal with it more. Criticism is not always the
> emotional plague but rather a heathy discourse in the realm of knowledge.
etc, etc,
> sincerely jogg
****** To the OML, - from Jim Martin ***********
For my part, I haven't made any posts to the OML because I was still waiting
for JOgg to reply to my last private letter, part of an ongoing communication.
It's been over 2 weeks, he seems to have cut off contact with me. Instead, he's
made various and variant statements about me publicly - quoting me from a
*private letter* - on his web page at PORE and on the OML instead of directing
them to the party involved. It's called "alienation". I intend to write
something about what happened, but I want to take my time and really study
what's transpired. Ogg's behavior has been positively indecent. Time and again,
he has levelled very serious charges at Jim DeMeo, without any factual basis,
then when his own faulty logic is pointed out to him, says he "doesn't feel like
dealing with it any more."
The letters Ogg has received objecting to his behavior weren't "harsh", they
were principled, rational, and most importantly, *private* criticism. Do I need
to point out the contradiction inherent in saying you do not "feel like airing
more" while doing just that? Or demanding that other people answer your
unfounded accusations while refusing to reply to real criticisms of your own
work?
For instance, while Ogg accused DeMeo of causing ecological damages in Isreal,
he carefully omitted the fact, reported by DeMeo on the same page Ogg took his
citation from, that the Isreali government dumped silver iodide on the storm
clouds as soon as they appeared. Isn't this significant? Why would Ogg neglect
to mention that?
I share people's legitimate concerns about anyone "monkeying with the weather".
While subjective impressions are a good starting point for any invstigation, a
lot of people assert the efficacy of the cloudbuster solely on "feeling" rather
than objective investigation. It seems strange to me that uninformed people feel
so confident that they can monitor & criticize the activities of scientists with
years of experience. As for DeMeo "indirectly claiming" responsibility for peace
in the middle east, maybe this is preposterous - just as preposterous as blaming
DeMeo for causing deaths with the cloudbuster. If people cannot discern the
distinction between *chronicity* and *cause*, fact and suspicion, science and
ideology, we certainly have bigger problems than "madmen with cloudbusters". For
instance: here's an item from the newspaper recently:
:(Caption of photo of a 2-headed snake being hand-fed a small frog.) "Bryon, a
:two-headed baby Herald snake, moves toward its prey held by a curator at the
:snake park in Durban, South Africa. Some traditional healers blame the snake
:for the nation's recent flooding and political violence."
OML! This snake must be stopped!
Cloudbusting is really a minor issue to me, like the two-headed snake. It
excites people because of their mystical attitudes about the weather. What about
the really heavy questions: what about children's sexuality? Do you really think
there can be an "open" debate on such issues without OML subscribers creating a
climate for it? Go ahead, just try and start talking about kids and sex on the
internet in the kind of way that cloudbusting has been approached here: I would
give it 48 hours before REAL CENSORSHIP shut us down. Censorship is an official
act of the government, not private individuals asserting their human right to
prevent damaging lies, nor their right to associate with whomever they wish.
Here's a statement from the "Blue-Ribbon Anti-Censorship Campaign", a coalition
of the ACLU, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), and other "free speech"
groups, that Jogg's apparently missed:
"The voice of reason knows that free speech doesn't equate to sexual harassment,
abuse of children, or the breeding of hatred or intolerance."
I'd like to have a lot of open debate, fresh air, free dialog, but unless people
on the OML can re-define the parameters of discussion, this won't happen here.
We'll be talking amongst ourselves about whether it's okay to turn the
flashlight on in an accumulator, without any input from those who've studied
these questions scientifically.
Is the OML a "public" forum? The OML consists of, at most, few dozen people. All
of whom are fortunate enough to be in possession of the material resources to
get online. Is it really fair, this "kangaroo court"? It goes to the heart of
the tragedy of Wilhelm Reich, who was dragged into court by a bunch of yahoos
and bureaucrats who didn't take the time to really understand his work.
I am discussing with several others the possibility of a moderated conference
*separate* from the OML. This conference will set some standards of what's
appropriate to the group, limit access to responsible participants, and respect
established protocols of scientific criticism. If you are interested in a
*factual* discussion of orgonomy, please contact me by private e-mail. For those
whose concept of "freedom" and "openness" includes rumor-mongering, defamation,
and baseless accusations, the OML will be their hunting grounds.
"The Emotional Plague" is not a character diagnosis, but a specific form or
social organization. If the OML, as a social organization, lacks the vitality to
resist parasitism, then it withers and dies.
-Jim Martin
********************************************************************
http://www.mcn.org/cbc/Bussect/Flatland/flatland.html
Flatland: POB 2420, Ft. Bragg, CA 95437
--- from list orgonomy@lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Many thanks for Geocities providing this free space
Get your own Free Home Page
bravenet.com