--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea <no_reply@...> wrote:
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, iranitea <no_reply@> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > Look, you do demonize Barry constantly. I have no problem with
> > > him, but you have a long history of obsessing on him, and easily
> > > applying the same labels, and words, for example LIAR, to all
> > > others and lump them together as a group. That's your tactics.
> > > It's called guilt by association. You even get upset, if somebody
> > > tries to stay neutral, like Rory recently, and not point out his
> > > evilness. Same with Robin, Curtis was accused by him to be 
> > > 'dishonest', because he regarded Barry as a friend. Can't be.
> > 
> > You should only know.
> > 
> > Look, this is just more nutty fantasizing. This is the
> > sort of thing Barry does all the time. 
> 
> And where he is right he is right.

Duh.

> > We really didn't
> > need another person making shit up. Where on *earth*
> > did you get the idea I was upset with Rory for not
> > "pointing out Barry's evilness"?? You are hallucinating.
> > Ask Rory if he thinks that was the case.
> 
> Maybe just try to read Rory's post, it should answer it.

Well, you're right, he does, or did, think it was a
possibility that I was upset because he was talking
to Barry. I'd forgotten that because it was such a
completely nutty idea. Did you read their exchange?
I thoroughly enjoyed watching him deal with Barry.
Poor Barry was so sure he was going to cut Rory down,
but he couldn't get to square one.

> > > I was, at the time, surprised and even shocked by the tone
> > > in the private email, which included the admission to your
> > > anger.
> > 
> > Ohhhhhh, *pooooor* iranitea, shocked by somebody's anger!
> > 
> > Jeez, what are you, six years old?
> 
> Little stupid, at the time, I didn't expect this from you.
> I didn't yet realize this was your Modus Operandi. Yeah,
> stupid to not have realized this earlier.

I do get angry when people mistreat others, yes, indeed.

> > That was *December 2011* and you're still gnashing your
> > teeth about it? You're still trying to "get" me because
> > I got angry with you?
> 
> I am not trying to GET you, that's your fantasy.

Oh, please. Of course you are. Good grief, have some
self-respect.

> You are the one of having a habit of dwelling in the past,
> of constantly referring to some old posts. You are the
> one who basically sleeps in the archive, not me. I'm only
> responding to you in kind, stupid.

Er, no. I only go to the archives when someone misrepresents
or asks about what happened in the past, not because somebody
got angry with me almost two years ago.

> > Maybe you should take up meditation. You've been away
> > for a year now, right? 
> 
> Not a year, can't count?

According to the archives, your last post here as iranitea
was in August 2012; your last post as zarzari was January
2012. Was there another name I'm forgetting in between then
and now?

> > And you come back with guns
> > blazing because an old post had wrong attributions?
> 
> Oops, is that forbidden? When I see my name with all wrong
> things I never said?

Oh, dear, oh, dear, oh, dear! How awful! But you didn't
see your name with all wrong things you never said in a
current post. You saw a *link* to that old post in a
discussion Lawson and I were having that had nothing
*whatsoever* to do with you and didn't refer to any of
those wrong things you never said. The chances that
anybody would click the link and read that whole very
long post, including the misattributed quotes, and go,
"Oh, my goodness, zarzari said *that*??" are pretty
close to zero. You just wanted to make a big fuss and
try to implicate me as having somehow misrepresented
you. You came here *gunning* for me.

> Sorry, You have called my Liar and all sort of names,
> right? you are intent of chasing everybody out, who
> disagrees with your favorite Teddy Bear of any time.

Boy, you really need some work on your English in
addition to your thinking. No, I am not "intent of
chasing" anybody out, for any reason. I don't have
that power. I do call people on their lies, and I do
defend people who are being misrepresented. Sue me.

> I have every right to point out a factual mistake.

Right. I never said otherwise. It's just that it's a
tempest in a molehill.

> > What were you doing while you were away? Sure doesn't
> > sound as though you were making any spiritual progress.

> Yep, short of any arguments, make a personal attack.

I've responded to every one of your arguments. Having
done so, I have the right to comment on what I think of
your behavior.

> Looking at this forum, on which you spend time daily, and
> which seems to be one of your major projects in your life,

Not.

> I don't think my absence has deprived me of any spiritual
> progress. To even think that anything you say here, has
> anything to do with your spiritual progress is kind of
> silly. This is not really the place, to talk about spiritual
> progress.

I never suggested spiritual progress was to be made here.
I was pointing out that you did not seem to have made any
spiritual progress in your *absence*. You're even more 
nasty and angry and reactive and generally hateful than
you were before you left.

> > > Instead of having this same kind of silly dialogue private,
> > > I had decided to take it public on FFL, with all your silly 
> > > accusations.
> > 
> > Ve-ry *smart*, Ma-ri-a, ve-ry *smart*.
> > 
> > <snicker>
> 
> Actually, I don't regret it. It's good, because it creates clarity. 

It was infantile. But it certainly did give us more
clarity on what kind of person you are.

> Okay, I'm out for today, it's late here. 
> 
> This is my impression of my short revisit to FFL

Oh, are you leaving us again, I hope?

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8g3fqchasU



Reply via email to