I've posted a few times on FFL in the past. In at least one of those post, I stated that I was supportive of John Knapp. I was his client for right at two years, from around 7/2008 through 6/2010. I have since publicly retracted (in March, 2011) my support and endorsement of John Knapp. In the past year+, due to my experiences with Knapp, I have from time to time put in a search on FFL for "knapp." At some point I ran across these posts from August which mention Knapp. (note: I haven't read this entire thread.) Up until now, I had decided to not respond regarding my (changed) opinion and experiences with Knapp. I've now decided to post in response to this particular FFL post. I choose this particular post because Knapp's (former?) non-profit, the CHSCA, is mentioned and linked. If anyone is interested: My retraction regarding Knapp is posted here:John M. Knapp, LMSW: Endorsements Retraction <http://tossandripple.blogspot.com/2011/01/john-m-knapp-lmsw.html> A rendition of a formal complaint is posted here:Complaint Overview <http://tossandripple.blogspot.com/p/complaint-overview.html> My responses to Knapp's online accusations of me are posted here: My statements addressing John M. Knapp's allegations & accusations <http://tossandripple.blogspot.com/p/my-statements-addressing-john-m-kna\ pps.html> (Note: Knapp's allegations are currently no longer accessible because the CHSCA site was taken down and Knapp also apparently deleted his corresponding FB threads.) Currently, I am unable to trust anything Knapp says. I am not the only one that has had harmful experiences with Knapp. I'm posting this for informational purposes and to note that I think Judy is right...at least regarding Knapp's dishonesty.
It was a rude awakening (to say the least) for me. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: > > > > Xeno, I have zero interest in either Andrew Skolnick > > or John Knapp, or in discussing what you or anyone > > else thinks about them. Neither person has really > > been part of my life for many, many years. Don't > > you think it would be odd and kind of obsessive for > > me to still care about them, much less still care > > enough to try to convince people to think of them > > the same way I do? > > How long has it been since MMY was part of your life, > again? How about Lenz? > > > Get it? That's what Judy is doing. She's still so > > obsessed with these people -- and with me -- that > > she cannot differentiate things that happened over > > a decade ago from what happened yesterday. > > You're still happening, dude. (In a manner of speaking, > that is.) > > And as I've already pointed out, Skolnick's and Knapp's > anti-TM crusades are *ongoing*. They're still happening > as well. > > Her > > obsession is such that in her mind these people > > who she once developed a grudge against are still > > "attacking her" in the present, even though they > > probably forgot her very existence years ago. > > Um, no, not Skolnick, at least not as far as I know, > not in public anyway (I'd be surprised if he hadn't > discussed me with Vaj, though, that is if Vaj is > telling the truth about his relationship with > Skolnick). > > Knapp did attack me two years ago right here on FFL. > > But their attacks on me were never the point. The > point is their integrity or lack of same. > > > A measure of how obsessed she really is is that > > whenever someone says the truth -- that these people > > have better things to do than remember Judy Stein -- > > she reacts by insisting that they're still as obsessed > > with her as she *obviously* is with them. > > Um, no, they're no more obsessed with me than I am > with them. There's a difference between *remembering* > and *being obsessed with*. There's no question they'd > *remember* me. And if you were to mention me to either > of them, they'd almost certainly have some very > negative things to say about me, just as I have some > very negative things to say about them when they're > mentioned. > > (In Knapp's interactions with me two years ago, the > last time he paid a visit to FFL, he made it very clear > he recalls our arguments on alt.m.t; he also remembers > our interactions on his TM-Free blog several years ago.) > > The only > > person obsessed, as far as I can tell, is Judy Stein. > > It's as if these grudges based on a few arguments on > > a couple of forums that no one reads anyway were so > > important to her -- and to her image of who she is -- > > that she can't let go of them. > > And yet look at you. You constantly bring up MMY and > go on and on about him. I very rarely *bring up* > Skolnick and Knapp myself, although I'll write about > them when someone else does. > > As of a year ago, Skolnick was still crusading against > TM. Knapp is still doing so as well, albeit in the > context of "cultic abuse" generally. Here's a diary > he wrote just this past March on his new Web site: > > http://thechsca.org/personal-stories/adult-stories/item/37-my-own-recove\ ry-from-spiritual-abuse > > http://tinyurl.com/3q85y73 > > > Who, after all, has had a life so devoid of real > > accomplishments that she feels the need to consistently > > try to get other people to go back and reread stuff she > > posted ten or more years ago on an obscure Internet > > forum read by at most a couple of dozen people? These > > inane arguments are her *accomplishments* in life? > > That's pretty fuckin' sad. > > Er, except what I've been suggesting Xeno do is to go > back and read stuff that Knapp and Skolnick posted. And > not just ten years ago. > > Not sure where you get the notion that I consider > arguments I've had on Internet forums to be my only > accomplishments in life, or even the more important > accomplishments in my life. That's your fantasy, not > the reality. > > Bottom line, except for your first two sentences, > everything you've said in this post is wrong, either > because you haven't been paying attention, or because > you've chosen to tell falsehoods. Not to mention the > hypocrisy of your demonizations in light of your own > behavior here with regard to MMY. > > Time to stop digging, dude. >
