--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Hugo" <fintlewoodlewix@> wrote: > > > > Can someone who knows where these alleged lies are please > > post me a link as I just had a search and couldn't find > > anything other than the usual "he said - she said" stuff. > > > > Where did this start, is it just about his JAMA article? > > You've seen it all before. If you actually look at > the exchanges, even "in context," it'll be deja vu > all over again for you.
Nope, we've never discussed many of Andrew's falsehoods here, including the one I specifically recommended to Hugo that he check out the threads about. > I lit into Andrew Skolnick some myself, but he > responded well, and with something his stalker has > never been able to pull off -- humor. Towards the > end Andrew and I were actually exchanging very > pleasant emails, pondering who the person was > who sent emails to his bosses trying to get him > fired. > > He was just a guy chasing down what he thought was > not only unethical behavior on the part of a pop > spiritual movement, but *systematic* and officially > condoned unethical behavior, on the level of the > Catholic Church's coverup of its pedophile priests. > His stalker didn't like that much, because at the > time she was completely into knee-jerk "defense" > of Anything TM or Maharishi. Barry, it wasn't I who sent emails to Andrew's bosses trying to get him fired. I'm pretty sure you not only know that, but know who *did* send them. So your attempt to smear me is reprehensible in the extreme. And as far as "stalking" is concerned, I'll remind you that it was Andrew who felt he had to put up a Web site denouncing me and others because he couldn't get away with slandering us on alt.m.t > The "taking things out of context" bit is horseshit. > There is no context in the universe that excuses or > could conceivably excuse the many verbatim quotes > that Andrew posted on his Junkyard Dog site. Not a matter of "excusing"--that's your term, not mine-- but of being intentionally misleading. Here's a challenge (which you'll ignore, because you don't dare give me a chance to prove you wrong): find a quote of something I said from that Web site that you think reflects especially poorly on me, and post it here. > I've often wondered what it's like to be a person > who has spent 16 to 17 YEARS trying, in dozens of > Internet posts a week, to get other people to hate > someone as much as they do. > > And failing. > > Twice. Um, not, actually, in either case. And I don't "hate" either of you. That's *your* response to people you find reason to criticize, not mine. > What a mind to have to live in, eh? What a hilarious comment when the topic is Andrew Skolnick, hater, muckraker, and stalker of TM and TMers extraordinaire-- and not only of TM and TMers but of all kinds of other people and organizations he considers malefactors of one sort or another and has spent his professional life attacking. Look at his CV that azgray posted, especially the list of invited talks. Some of his targets no doubt deserved to be attacked; Andrew's a good liberal, and I give him kudos for standing up for those oppressed by the establishment. But he's got a major bug up his ass about any form of alternative medicine or the paranormal; he considers James Randi to have been his mentor. BTW, just for fun, one of the more fascinating exchanges between Andrew and Barry involved a "satirical" post Barry had made under one name, then reposted sometime later under another name, pretending to have discovered it and saved it because he liked it so much. Andrew recognized the repost from the first time and called Barry on the lie that someone else had written it.
