--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@...> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "Ravi Yogi" raviyogi@ wrote: > > > Would you care to give a brief summary of why you think > > it's credible? > > I read it, and I found it credible. It's hard to say why > something like this book has the ring of authenticity; > it's more a matter of whether it has any signs of > *in*authenticity. And it didn't, as far as I could tell. > > Part of it is that it's so amateurishly written. > Typically, folks who write sensational false exposes do > so with a great deal of care because they know what > they write is going to be closely scrutinized, and they > want to make sure it's as convincing as they can > possibly make it. I didn't get any sense of that sort of > calculation from Judith's book, but rather of an > unskilled, awkward, artless innocence. That's really, > really hard to fake. > > Another aspect--probably even more significant--is that > the tone isn't vindictive but instead sad and regretful, > almost wistful. That isn't typical of a false expose > either. She spends quite a bit of time expressing her > great admiration for MMY; she doesn't try to make him > into a villain or a fraud as some of the critics here do. > > So those are two specific points. The rest is mostly > intuition: it just *sounds true*. > Sorry that just doesn't cut it. > > If you are going to lose any commission on this book > > by doing so please forgive me and feel free to ignore. > > Oh, give me a *break*, Ravi! You sound like Nabby at > his absolute worst. Why do you even care about any of > this anyway? >
I have a Nabby, a Judy, a Jim, a Rick, a Curtis, a Trickster Turqster, a rest of the other posters in me, I always accept everything. And why do I care? Why do I care? Goddammit !!! I have an equal right as the other posters to indulge in insipid insinuating innuendos. I have really a good credible witness that has pointed to the involvement of Rick and Curtis here - let's call this credible witness Credible Witness "R", I have yet another credible witness, referred for simplicity as Credible Witness "A" that has backed up the claims of Credible Witness "R". There are also two other credible witnesses - for convenience sake here referred to as Credible Witness "V" and Credible Witness "I" who have graciously agreed to be on standby should the accounts of Credible Witness "R" and Credible Witness "A" be ever doubted. I, personally have no doubt about the veracity of the statements of all these credible witnesses. YMMV.
