LOL Barry, you are the most creative paranoid, delusional narcissist I have ever seen, you are on a roll, keep it going baby.
On Jan 4, 2013, at 3:08 PM, turquoiseb <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Carol" wrote: > > > > Thanks Judy. > > > > Also, I understand why Barry would view me as a "cyberstalker" > > based on what Knapp has stated about me. Plus, the only thing > > I've posted on this list in the last 1-1/2(?) years has been > > about Knapp. > > Duh. That's exactly it. You barged onto a forum that you have no other > interest in EXCEPT as a means of "getting" someone you have a grudge against. > I've never heard anything that Knapp said about you; I'm judging you because > of *your* behavior. > > > Barry may not recall that I had posted a few years prior > > that I was a teenage TMer and was looking at going to MMU. > > Then again, maybe he does recall, but I don't know why he > > would. It's been awhile. > > Barry doesn't give a shit. I've found both you AND your motives repulsive > from Day One. Since Judy seems to believe that Wikipedia is to be trusted in > all things, let's see what it has to say about cyberstalking, eh? > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberstalking > > Please note the parts about it being a criminal offense. Note also some of > the typical behavior of cyberstalkers: > > Attempts to gather information about the victim. Cyberstalkers may approach > their victim's friends, family and work colleagues to obtain personal > information. > > Monitoring their target's online activities and attempting to trace their IP > address in an effort to gather more information about their victims. > > Encouraging others to harass the victim. Many cyberstalkers try to involve > third parties in the harassment. They may claim the victim has harmed the > stalker or his/her family in some way, or may post the victim's name and > telephone number in order to encourage others to join the pursuit. > You're an official Cyberstalker as far as I'm concerned, and that has > *nothing* to do with how I feel about John Knapp. He may be the worst flake > in the world, but *he* is not the person who has devoted the best part of a > year to tracking his movements and his activities and trying anything she > could to harm his reputation or to get him into trouble. > > You're a fuckin' loon. The only reason Judy is agreeing with you or > supporting you is that she is a Cyberstalker, too, and John Knapp is one of > *her* ongoing victims as well, because he was instrumental in revealing > truths about the TM movement and Maharishi she would have preferred remain > hidden. The only reason Nabby chimed in is because he also bears a grudge > because of Knapp's TM whistleblowing, too. > > The three of you make a lovely group: > > > > ************ > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Carol" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > At the end of December, 2012, I decided to bring forth Knapp's 2011 > > > > > online defamatory posts aimed at myself and others. > > > > > This link contains a table of contents to Knapp's posts that I am > > > > > bringing forward. > > > > > > > > Please go away. You're a stalker. Nobody cares that you > > > > didn't like it when Knapp refused to continue working > > > > with you as a patient. I have no great love for John, > > > > but I can certainly see why he would have decided that. > > > > > > Barry, you know exactly nothing about this. What you think > > > you know is wrong. Knapp is a potential menace to anyone > > > considering counseling with him. Hopefully he's gone out > > > of the therapy business for good. If so, anything Carol did > > > to bring this about she should be congratulated for. It > > > took more guts than you dream of having. > > > > > > >
