--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > I was going to ask you as well to acknowledge that > > Barry quite deliberately misrepresented my post, > > as I pointed out in my reply to him, but I see > > you've decided not to risk your relationship with > > him by correcting what he wrote and have instead > > done a 180 on what you said in the post I'm > > responding to. > > In response to this, let's put back the > parts of my post that Judy so carefully > snipped out of it when replying to it. > Remember, above she is claiming that I > "deliberately misrepresented her post." > The following are the things I said that > she chose *not* to deal with.
Barry's so proud of his invective, isn't he? I didn't "deal with" the stuff I cut because most of it is obviously just Barry's standard jaundiced opinion--all of which we've heard before, over and over, aggravated in this case by his fury at my having caught him in a whole series of lies over the past few days. And most of his attempt to "prove" the correctness of his opinion about my response to Vaj was, as I said, based on his lie that I had claimed to limit myself to providing a positive interpretation of what the TMO says and does, and that this is what I claimed to have been doing in my response to Vaj. That wasn't true, and Barry knew it wasn't true when he wrote it. Oh, and he's also annoyed that Boo said some nice things about me in his response, when Barry was hoping he'd blast me as Barry did. I'm going to snip the opinion again and "deal with" a few of the inaccurate bits. <snip ranting opinion> >From Barry's description of the thread: "Enter Judy, claws bared, defending the man posing as a woman because he's a **TM** man posing as a woman." I wasn't defending ed11 at all, of course, not because she's a TMer or for any other reason. I was making fun of Vaj. <snip> > and included *only* this, including only the > last paragraph, so that she could aim some > invective at Andrew Skolnick again, someone > who dumped her over a decade ago, but against > whom she still has an ongoing vendetta: "Dumped her"?? Is Barry fantasizing that Skolnick and I were carrying on a secret romantic relationship in private while at each other's throats on alt.m.t? Oh, this is funny. Barry was so proud of his invective he quoted a whole hunk of it *twice*. <snip ranting opinion *for the second time in the same post*> <snip> > She then goes on for a couple of long > paragraphs to say how *proud* she is > of this website. > > Well, I should think she should be. The > only thing really on it ARE HER WORDS. Blatant lie, and Barry knows it. There's plenty from Skolnick himself, as well as sections on other TMers who helped me fight his dishonesty on alt.m.t. <snip> > Those of you who are tempted to believe > Judy's description of herself and her > "honesty" and her noble motives here on > FFL, even after noticing how much of my > post she couldn't bring herself to deal > with, Barry, you're losing it. Here, I'll "deal with" almost everything I snipped: No, I'm not. No, I don't. No, I haven't. No, that's not why. > These are the things that Judy Stein was > saying on a regular basis YEARS before > Vaj entered her life. She said many of > these insulting, demeaning, and hateful > things TO FELLOW TMers, not to "anti-TMers." > All that Andrew did was collect and > catalog them. Another lie. Go read the site: > She hasn't changed one iota since then. > > http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/ > > Note the TONE of these posts. Compare and > contrast it to her present tone, and then > laugh when she talks about Vaj's "tone" > that she claims she's reacting to. Note the > *personal* attacks, free for the most part > of any content except an attempt to demonize > the person she is talking to. Skolnick, of course, deliberately snipped much of the context, including his incredibly vicious personal attacks on me and other TMers (which put my attacks in the shade), as well as the actual substantive content of my responses rebutting his lies. *Barry knows this*. Those who weren't there at the time would have to go back to the Google archives of alt.m.t to see the context. > And finally, when she reads this post and > belatedly replies (as you know she will) > to what she so carefully snipped out of > her earlier reply to me, note how she deals > with my description of the thread being > discussed here, and her part in it. Barry's description of the thread was minimally accurate, albeit colored by his current out-of- control fury at me and ed11. I've "dealt with" the parts that required comment. As to Barry's main thesis, if you actually look at my posts, you'll find I very rarely issue any "invective" without distinct provocation, and virtually never without any actual substance. And the bottom line is the unbelievable hypocrisy of *Barry*, of all people, criticizing anybody else for personal attacks.
