posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 10:55 AM
Originally posted by Dock6
Well, you care enough to respond.
Yet your response is just more of your old-lady nonsense, isn't it ?
And yet I'm sitting in my warm, comfortable office drinking this delicious coffee while Gaiaguys are stocking up on soap-on-a-rope. Sort of destroys
all your credibility, huh?
The Gaiaguys, as you know (or SHOULD, seeing you're posting about it) simply cut and pasted OTO drivel from the OTO website.
Wrong. Gaiaguys falsely accused Australian Ordo Templi Orientis members of engaging in criminal and acts heinous acts. When such false claims by spoke
word, it's called "slander". When in print, it's called "libel". Both are illegal.
The Australian O.T.O. members were willing to forgive and forget after the original ruling, with which Gaiaguys failed to comply, showing once again
If the OTO did not wish the public to know about their beliefs and activities --- why did they publish same with the public domain ?
We're not talking about O.T.O. beliefs and practices, we're talking about Gaiaguys committing criminal acts by falsely accusing innocent people of
heinous crimes, and then contempt of court.