Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-17 Thread Share Long
Judy, I don't have what you call an insatiable urge to pander. But I often make 
conscious choices to say what I like about someone's posts. There's a big 
difference and it's one you imo cannot see because you are at the other end of 
the spectrum, tending to be hyper critical.

And in this particular case, Carol was asking Richard if he was being sarcastic 
or serious or what. So my comment was addressing that as well as telling 
Richard what I like about his posts. Why not? In fact, you yourself praised 
Carol in this thread. Was that also what you call pandering?  






On Sunday, February 16, 2014 1:54 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com 
authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
  
Sheesh, that had nothing to do with any grudge. I was just poking fun at her 
insatiable urge to pander. That's not necessary either, certainly not with 
Richard. Nor was this post of yours, for that matter!

Plus which, unless you're on dial-up and not broadband, I seriously doubt that 
data traffic gets slowed down by lots of posts. 


 See?, this is exactly the reason you are seen as a grudge 
holder here.

Was there any need to make that post? Excessive posts clog 
up the bandwidth and slow down data traffic. 


---authfriend authfriend@... wrote:


Share to the defense! guffaw

 Richard, I admit that your writing style delights me. Even when I don't 
agree with the content! Go figure!
It's just that you almost always sound light hearted about all this stuff. And 
I thoroughly enjoy how you skip from one topic to the other. Those funny combo 
help me be more light hearted about it too. Anyway, thank you so much for 
making me smile and even laugh out loud a lot. 




Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-17 Thread Richard J. Williams

On 2/16/2014 9:57 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
*Richard is a troll and says all kinds of things that aren't true or 
are wildly distorted*


This message contains one falsehood and one character smear:

First, calling someone a troll makes assumptions about a writer's 
motives that are impossible to determine unless you are a mind reader. 
The term troll is highly subjective, and some posts will look like 
trolling to some while seeming like meaningful contributions to others.


The term 'Internet Troll' is frequently abused to slander opponents in 
heated debates and is frequently misapplied by those who are ignorant of 
internet etiquette.


Second, none of my messages are wildly distorted.

What is so insulting about this message is that it is posted to a thread 
on a spiritual help forum in a about a mental health professional being 
accused of unprofessional conduct. Her message in itself is abusive and 
similar to the very tactics Mr. Knapp is accused of using on Ms Piper - 
it's in fact a parody of Knapp's message Carol. Go figure..


Maybe it's time for Ms Stein to take a long sabbatical from posting - 
then in a year or two, when she can dialog like a professional, or a 
least like a decent human being, she could return - at present she is 
neither.





Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-17 Thread Richard J. Williams

On 2/16/2014 3:34 PM, steve.sun...@yahoo.com wrote:
I don't think she can help herself. 


Judy just can't help herself - some people just feel better when they 
have someone to talk to.


Years ago, Judy followed me over here from Google Groups - it's like she 
was stalking me or something. She seemed so paranoid that me or Barry 
would say something about her over here on FFL, that she signed up as a 
FFL member so she could monitor our messages. It looks to me like she's 
being doing that 24 x 7  for years now, posting corrections every hour 
and trying to correct me and Barry for leaving her over there. She got 
beat up pretty bad over there, Steve, and it is taking her a long time 
to get over it.  Go figure.


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread salyavin808
Please can we ago back to 50 posts a week, it's for your sanity as much as 
everybody elses
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote:

 Note the phrase, in Robin's cult, as if it were established fact that he has 
a cult. He doesn't, of course. But Share didn't choose her words by accident. 





Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread TurquoiseBee
Does anyone remember my prediction, about how a certain obsessive and her 
brown-nosing buddy would continue to obsess over Judy getting caught in a lie, 
and as a result subject this place to dozens of their mono-topical gotta get 
even posts? 


The fun thing is that they can't blame it on me without *revealing themselves* 
to be obsessives and grudge-holders. Bawwy has made only one post this 
posting week, about a funny book, so they can't pretend they're responding to 
his provocations. Compare and contrast to these two Robin cultists (who have 
made 45...so far), still stalking their enemies and finding a way to turn 
almost every topic into something about Robin so they can prosyletize about 
him, all while claiming that Robin doesn't have a cult.


And of course there are the obsess about Barry posts that neither of them 
seems to be able to do without at this point. They may complain about trolls, 
but let's face it...these two bimbos are the ones who are so easily trolled. 
They fall for it even when Richand and I *tell* them what we're doing. And they 
like to characterize *other* people here as stupid. Go figure. :-)  :-)  :-)



 From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2014 10:03 AM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 


  
Please can we ago back to 50 posts a week, it's for your sanity as much as 
everybody elses


---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote:


Note the phrase, in Robin's cult, as if it were established fact that he has 
a cult. He doesn't, of course. But Share didn't choose her words by accident.



Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread authfriend
I seem to have scared the piss out of Barry by pointing out how he's been lying 
about never reading my posts. Now the only way he can comment on them is to 
respond to someone else's comment on a post of mine quoting me, and he has to 
be careful not to mention anything else I've said. Oh, and he can't comment on 
Ann's posts because he's claimed he never reads hers, either. Really kind of 
limiting. ;-) 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb@... wrote:

 Does anyone remember my prediction, about how a certain obsessive and her 
brown-nosing buddy would continue to obsess over Judy getting caught in a lie, 
and as a result subject this place to dozens of their mono-topical gotta get 
even posts? 

 

 The fun thing is that they can't blame it on me without *revealing themselves* 
to be obsessives and grudge-holders. Bawwy has made only one post this 
posting week, about a funny book, so they can't pretend they're responding to 
his provocations. Compare and contrast to these two Robin cultists (who have 
made 45...so far), still stalking their enemies and finding a way to turn 
almost every topic into something about Robin so they can prosyletize about 
him, all while claiming that Robin doesn't have a cult.

 

 And of course there are the obsess about Barry posts that neither of them 
seems to be able to do without at this point. They may complain about trolls, 
but let's face it...these two bimbos are the ones who are so easily trolled. 
They fall for it even when Richand and I *tell* them what we're doing. And they 
like to characterize *other* people here as stupid. Go figure. :-)  :-)  :-)
 

 From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2014 10:03 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 
 
   Please can we ago back to 50 posts a week, it's for your sanity as much as 
everybody elses

 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote:

 Note the phrase, in Robin's cult, as if it were established fact that he has 
a cult. He doesn't, of course. But Share didn't choose her words by accident. 




 


 











Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread jedi_spock

I think he enjoys trolling, baiting and getting stalked.

You enjoy correcting, fighting, nitpicking and getting 
people to task.

He insists that he doesn't read your posts. You insist that 
you hold no grudge against him.

Again, Yin and Yang.

 --- authfriend authfri...@yahoo.com

 I seem to have scared the piss out of Barry by pointing out how he's been 
lying about never reading my posts. Now the only way he can comment on them is 
to respond to someone else's comment on a post of mine quoting me, and he has 
to be careful not to mention anything else I've said. Oh, and he can't comment 
on Ann's posts because he's claimed he never reads hers, either. Really kind of 
limiting. ;-)

--- turquoiseb turquoiseb@... wrote:

 Does anyone remember my prediction, about how a certain obsessive and her 
brown-nosing buddy would continue to obsess over Judy getting caught in a lie, 
and as a result subject this place to dozens of their mono-topical gotta get 
even posts? 

 

 The fun thing is that they can't blame it on me without *revealing themselves* 
to be obsessives and grudge-holders. Bawwy has made only one post this 
posting week, about a funny book, so they can't pretend they're responding to 
his provocations. Compare and contrast to these two Robin cultists (who have 
made 45...so far), still stalking their enemies and finding a way to turn 
almost every topic into something about Robin so they can prosyletize about 
him, all while claiming that Robin doesn't have a cult.

 

 And of course there are the obsess about Barry posts that neither of them 
seems to be able to do without at this point. They may complain about trolls, 
but let's face it...these two bimbos are the ones who are so easily trolled. 
They fall for it even when Richand and I *tell* them what we're doing. And they 
like to characterize *other* people here as stupid. Go figure. :-)  :-)  :-)
 

 From: salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
 Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2014 10:03 AM
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 
 
   Please can we ago back to 50 posts a week, it's for your sanity as much as 
everybody elses

 
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote:

 Note the phrase, in Robin's cult, as if it were established fact that he has 
a cult. He doesn't, of course. But Share didn't choose her words by accident. 




 


 











Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread awoelflebater

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote:

 Please can we ago back to 50 posts a week, it's for your sanity as much as 
everybody elses
 

 I asked for the post limit shortly before Christmas but I was poo-pooed and 
shot down. I thought I, too, was going to go mad with all of Ricky and Share's 
posts. Crazyville! But it doesn't appear that anyone wants to take on the 
monitoring/counting job and we are apparently all big boys and girls and can 
handle it. Or so they say.
 

 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote:

 Note the phrase, in Robin's cult, as if it were established fact that he has 
a cult. He doesn't, of course. But Share didn't choose her words by accident. 



 



Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread doctordumbass
Another KEY piece of advice, Share -- DON'T open any emails from Africa, esp. 
Nigeria - no doubt you'll mortgage your parents house, if you do.:-)

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread authfriend
Actually what I insist is that holding a grudge is not an appropriate phrase 
to describe my attitude toward Barry, because his offenses have been ongoing. 
That doesn't mean I don't think he's a lying scumbag, however.
 

  I think he enjoys trolling, baiting and getting stalked.
 

 You enjoy correcting, fighting, nitpicking and getting 
 people to task.
 

 He insists that he doesn't read your posts. You insist that 
 you hold no grudge against him.
 

 Again, Yin and Yang. 
 

 I seem to have scared the piss out of Barry by pointing out how he's been 
lying about never reading my posts. Now the only way he can comment on them is 
to respond to someone else's comment on a post of mine quoting me, and he has 
to be careful not to mention anything else I've said. Oh, and he can't comment 
on Ann's posts because he's claimed he never reads hers, either. Really kind of 
limiting. ;-)
 












Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread Richard J. Williams
On 2/15/2014 11:50 AM, jchwe...@gmail.com wrote:
 It was a type of psychological/emotional rape that Knapp exacted upon 
 more than one person. 
 
Thanks for the information about Knapp. We've been discussing this 
almost endlessly for months. We just got rid of one therapist who came 
to this discussion group and tried to psychologically rape one of our 
informants - it's been a total mind-fuck ever since! Now we not only 
have to defend ourselves from the anonymous mind police posting here, 
but these days even some informants from of the TM-Free are attacking us 
- trying to use mind control and brainwashing techniques on us,  in 
order to get us to stop meditating and stop supporting some poor Hindu 
boys trying to get an education up in Fairfield and over in India. Go 
figure.


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread dhamiltony2k5
Dear Dear Awoelflebate and friends, to the 50 post limit I have offered my help 
with moderating FFL many times and everyone is clearly scared of me taking care 
of things here.  I don't understand people's unfriendliness to my offers.  Try 
as I might to be charismatic here and take some better control of FFL I have 
achieved no followers for my moderation movement. No charisma, no cult, no coup 
de tat. Damn. Fairness is my middle name. You people will one day come see the 
light under my hat.   Signed, FFL 30!-posts-a-week Buck and a much tighter 
control over FFL membership and those unkind personal posts being made here.. 
Jai Guru Dev, -Buck in the Dome 
 
 Please can we ago back to 50 posts a week, it's for your sanity as much as 
everybody elses
 

 

Awoelflebater writes: I asked for the post limit shortly before Christmas but I 
was poo-pooed and shot down. I thought I, too, was going to go mad with all of 
Ricky and Share's posts. Crazyville! But it doesn't appear that anyone wants to 
take on the monitoring/counting job and we are apparently all big boys and 
girls and can handle it. Or so they say.
 
 



 





Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread authfriend
Carol, I'm not sure you've been around FFL long enough to know that Richard is 
a troll and says all kinds of things that aren't true or are wildly distorted, 
as he does in this post. If you ever have a question about the veracity of 
something he posts, ask one of the regulars. 

  Thanks for the information about Knapp. We've been discussing this  almost 
endlessly for months. We just got rid of one therapist who came 
 to this discussion group and tried to psychologically rape one of our 
 informants - it's been a total mind-fuck ever since! Now we not only 
 have to defend ourselves from the anonymous mind police posting here, 
 but these days even some informants from of the TM-Free are attacking us 
 - trying to use mind control and brainwashing techniques on us, in 
 order to get us to stop meditating and stop supporting some poor Hindu 
 boys trying to get an education up in Fairfield and over in India. Go 
 figure. 





Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread Richard J. Williams
On 2/15/2014 11:50 AM, jchwe...@gmail.com wrote:
 After the news sank in, I realized I felt like I just wanted to take a 
 shower and wash it all off.
 
That's what it feels like alright - except we can't seem to get out of 
the cesspool. Almost every post sent here goes to shit in a matter on 
minutes! Almost everyday we TMers on FFL are getting mind-raped by 
anonymous posters attempting to start fights with us and try to take 
over our minds by posting inflammatory messages with the intent to 
confuse and trap us with parodies posts and fibs and stuff. One 
informant almost started a riot the other day by insinuating that the 
TMers on FFL were trolls - WHOSE FUKIN NEWSGROUP IS THIS ANYWAY?!!! Go 
figure.


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread Richard J. Williams
On 2/15/2014 11:50 AM, jchwe...@gmail.com wrote:
 One of Knapp's former victims responded..And now we heal.
 
Well, if the post-trappers and mental therapists would stop trying to 
push our buttons and trying to take over FFL and trying to mentally rape 
our minds; if they would stop making up parodies and lying to us about 
our leaders; if they would just shut their big pie holes for just a few 
hours so we TMers could get in a word edgewise;  - WE COULD START THE 
HEALING PROCESS. We've been getting mind-fucked for at least two years 
by some anti-TM anti-MMY trolls. Thank you for posting this.


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread Richard J. Williams
On 2/15/2014 7:07 PM, Share Long wrote:
 I also want to make the point that Emily posted some definitions of 
 the term psychological rape so again, I'm quite sure that no one on 
 FFL thought that I coined the term.
 
The term psychological rape is frequently used in cult awareness 
discussion boards to describe how some people feel when some anonymous 
therapist tries to attack our online TMer group and tries to brainwash 
us into renouncing  our religion and our spiritual practice. When they 
do this, we usually send them packing with a few words just to let them 
know that we see through their snake-oil scams and button-pushing - we 
almost always reveal them to be impostors and cranks. It's open season 
on the trolls, liars, parody posters, and button-pushers! Maybe they 
should all go back to TM-Free where they belong.

WE ARE MAD AS HELL AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!!!


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread Share Long
Richard, I admit that your writing style delights me. Even when I don't agree 
with the content! Go figure!
It's just that you almost always sound light hearted about all this stuff. And 
I thoroughly enjoy how you skip from one topic to the other. Those funny combo 
help me be more light hearted about it too. Anyway, thank you so much for 
making me smile and even laugh out loud a lot. 





On Sunday, February 16, 2014 9:51 AM, Richard J. Williams 
pundits...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  
On 2/15/2014 11:50 AM, jchwe...@gmail.com wrote:
 It was a type of psychological/emotional rape that Knapp exacted upon 
 more than one person. 

Thanks for the information about Knapp. We've been discussing this 
almost endlessly for months. We just got rid of one therapist who came 
to this discussion group and tried to psychologically rape one of our 
informants - it's been a total mind-fuck ever since! Now we not only 
have to defend ourselves from the anonymous mind police posting here, 
but these days even some informants from of the TM-Free are attacking us 
- trying to use mind control and brainwashing techniques on us,  in 
order to get us to stop meditating and stop supporting some poor Hindu 
boys trying to get an education up in Fairfield and over in India. Go 
figure.



Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread authfriend
Share to the defense! guffaw 

  Richard, I admit that your writing style delights me. Even when I don't 
agree with the content! Go figure! It's just that you almost always sound light 
hearted about all this stuff. And I thoroughly enjoy how you skip from one 
topic to the other. Those funny combo help me be more light hearted about it 
too. Anyway, thank you so much for making me smile and even laugh out loud a 
lot. 
 

 
 
 On Sunday, February 16, 2014 9:51 AM, Richard J. Williams punditster@... 
wrote:
 
   On 2/15/2014 11:50 AM, jchwelch@... wrote:
  It was a type of psychological/emotional rape that Knapp exacted upon 
  more than one person. 
 
 Thanks for the information about Knapp. We've been discussing this 
 almost endlessly for months. We just got rid of one therapist who came 
 to this discussion group and tried to psychologically rape one of our 
 informants - it's been a total mind-fuck ever since! Now we not only 
 have to defend ourselves from the anonymous mind police posting here, 
 but these days even some informants from of the TM-Free are attacking us 
 - trying to use mind control and brainwashing techniques on us, in 
 order to get us to stop meditating and stop supporting some poor Hindu 
 boys trying to get an education up in Fairfield and over in India. Go 
 figure.


 


 













Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread Richard J. Williams
On 2/15/2014 8:43 PM, jchwe...@gmail.com wrote:

 Judy...that is correct. there was no sexual or romantic relationship 
 between Knapp  I.

 Neither I am aware of any stories regarding sexual abuse and Knapp.
 
Thanks for all the information. Maybe that impostor Michael Jackson 
was just trolling for attention and making stuff up - we get that a lot 
here from trolls and paraody-pushers. On discussion groups or bulletin 
boards this type of post is called an effect change - stating extreme 
positions to make his or her actual beliefs seem moderate. It should be 
noted that this MJ alias is a contributor to Knapp's web site, TM-Free 
blog. Go figure.


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread Bhairitu
The 50 post limit was stupid.  Alex doesn't want to deal with it.  It's 
no problem to ignore the riff raff if you read the group with an email 
client like Thunderbird. Grown ups don't need no stinkin' post limit.


On 02/16/2014 02:15 AM, jedi_sp...@yahoo.com wrote:



I concur. I find it difficult to wade through all this
pig-muck and cattle manure to find an odd gem or two.

The 50 post limit is got to be back. This group is once
again turning anarchist as it was years ago.

BTW, how's the weather in old blighty?

---Salyavin808 no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote:

Please can we ago back to 50 posts a week, it's for your sanity as 
much as everybody elses


--- authfriend@... wrote:

Note the phrase, in Robin's cult, as if it were established fact
that he has a cult. He doesn't, of course. But Share didn't choose
her words by accident.






Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread Richard J. Williams

On 2/16/2014 10:06 AM, jchwe...@gmail.com wrote:

Or are you serious Richard?


Seriously, I feel like I just got mind-fucked again today. It's almost 
to the point that the button-pushers have taken over the whole 
newsgroup. All we want to do is meditate twice a day, chat with a few 
TMers, and support some poor Hindu boys over in India. Why is that so 
difficult to deal with? Why do therapists and cult reformers have to 
troll here to tell us what to do - it's a free country, we can pray and 
believe in anything we want to, up to and including that people can fly 
and become enlightened. Go figure.


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread Richard J. Williams

On 2/16/2014 1:31 PM, jedi_sp...@yahoo.com wrote:

See?, this is exactly the reason you are seen as a grudge
holder here.

Was there any need to make that post? Excessive posts clog
up the bandwidth and slow down data traffic.

---authfriend authfriend@... wrote:

Share to the defense! guffaw


We have to put up with this kind of snark all day on FFL posted by the 
button-pushers. Poor Share: she complained that dialoging with Robin was 
like getting psychologically raped, and gets another mind-fuck reply 
from Judy, blaming the victim, and mocking her. If Judy was a therapist 
instead of an editor, she'd probably get her license revoked. We came 
here to get some spiritual help, not get our mind fucked up by 
pseudo-therapists and computer repair men. Go figure.




Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread Share Long
Richard, I thought Judy was an editor. Are you telling us she's really a 
computer repair man?! Go figure!





On Sunday, February 16, 2014 2:12 PM, Richard J. Williams 
pundits...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  
On 2/16/2014 1:31 PM, jedi_sp...@yahoo.com wrote:

See?, this is exactly the reason you are seen as a grudge 
holder here.

Was there any need to make that post? Excessive posts clog 
up the bandwidth and slow down data traffic.

---authfriend authfriend@... wrote:


Share to the defense! guffaw

We have to put up with this kind of snark all day on FFL posted by
the button-pushers. Poor Share: she complained that dialoging with
Robin was like getting psychologically raped, and gets another mind-fuck 
reply from Judy, blaming the victim, and mocking her. If Judy was a therapist 
instead of an editor, she'd probably get her license revoked. We came here to 
get some spiritual help, not get our mind fucked up by pseudo-therapists and 
computer repair men. Go figure.




Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread Richard J. Williams

On 2/16/2014 12:59 PM, jedi_sp...@yahoo.com wrote:

You always give the knockout punch
and seal the argument.


So, let's review what we know:

John Knapp got his therapist license revoked for unprofessional behavior 
with more than one client. One of his clients said she felt like she had 
been psychologically/mentally raped by Knapp. When we got this news, 
Judy tried to pull Share into the conversation by trying to get us to 
blame Share for posting the almost same comment about Robin, somehow 
trying to connect the two incidents together, blaming the victims - 
typical button-pushing behavior. Go figure.


We were just talking about button-pushers yesterday and now comes news 
that Knapp was a button-pusher himself. So, it looks like we got abused 
by Knapp and parody-posted by Robin. It looks like we just can't get 
away from the therapists who want to save us from ourselves - they 
followed me here from Google Groups and have been causing trouble ever 
since they found out I was over here on Yahoo Groups taking up for the 
MMY. There is just no stopping these trolls! Go figure.


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread Richard J. Williams
On 2/16/2014 2:38 PM, Share Long wrote:
 Are you telling us she's really a computer repair man?
 
Probably a computer nerd - rumor has it that Judy is pretty savvy 
about computers and computer software.

The newest contributors to JK's TM-Free blog are the alias Michael H. 
Jackson and the Masked Zebra - the computer repairman and the 
spiritual therapist. We don't know why they trolled over here to harass 
us on FFL and why Judy keeps enabling their bad behavior. You'd think 
she could do better than just babbling on and on about the MZ as if he 
was some kind of parody-posting, intellectual giant or God or something. 
At least the MJ guy isn't trying to trap us into believing in levitation 
events or mountainside enlightenment events - MJ seems to be a pretty 
sensible working guy, trying to support his family - not a cult leader 
posting trick parodies and trying to recruit some new members for his 
own cult of computer-nerds. Go figure.


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-16 Thread Richard J. Williams

On 2/16/2014 9:57 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
*Carol, I'm not sure you've been around FFL long enough to know that 
Richard is a troll and says all kinds of things that aren't true or 
are wildly distorted, as he does in this post. If you ever have a 
question about the veracity of something he posts, ask one of the 
regulars.*


Carol, if you see anything posted by me that looks like trolling or is 
untrue or distorted, please let me know. Thanks. - One of the regulars


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread Michael Jackson
not surprising that he would eventually follow in his form master's foot steps 
- there are others who have like Bob Fickes

On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stan...@yahoo.com j_alexander_stan...@yahoo.com 
wrote:

 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
   
   
   Interesting... when you posted earlier this
 morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one
 thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked
 therapist self-description he uses to promote himself.
 I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the
 consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of
 honor. Strange guy, that one.
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 jchwe...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Thanks for the
 kind words Anne. Of
 course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of
 the brief outline.IMO (and others who were
 involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has
 harmed more than one person, including at least three
 ex-clients. From Knapp's online public
 displays, he has claimed he lost his license over at least a
 year ago (and that due to a lawsuit), though that isn't
 the case because the ruling wasn't made until January,
 2014, and there was never a lawsuit. Regardless, Knapp seems
 to wear a lost license (or as he publicly describes himself
 as a defrocked therapist) as a badge of being a
 rebel, or something. At least now, there is a public
 official ruling which will make it difficult for him to get
 licensed again if he ever would have an interest in doing
 so.Thanks again. Hope you and the horses are
 well. :-)
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread authfriend
You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own twisted footsteps. 

  not surprising that he would eventually follow in his form master's foot 
steps - there are others who have like Bob Fickes  

 On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stanley@... mailto:j_alexander_stanley@... 
j_alexander_stanley@... mailto:j_alexander_stanley@... wrote:
 
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Interesting... when you posted earlier this
 morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one
 thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked
 therapist self-description he uses to promote himself.
 I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the
 consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of
 honor. Strange guy, that one.
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 jchwelch@... mailto:jchwelch@... wrote:
 
 Thanks for the
 kind words Anne. Of
 course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of
 the brief outline.IMO (and others who were
 involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has
 harmed more than one person, including at least three
 ex-clients. From Knapp's online public
 displays, he has claimed he lost his license over at least a
 year ago (and that due to a lawsuit), though that isn't
 the case because the ruling wasn't made until January,
 2014, and there was never a lawsuit. Regardless, Knapp seems
 to wear a lost license (or as he publicly describes himself
 as a defrocked therapist) as a badge of being a
 rebel, or something. At least now, there is a public
 official ruling which will make it difficult for him to get
 licensed again if he ever would have an interest in doing
 so.Thanks again. Hope you and the horses are
 well. :-) 




Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread Michael Jackson
I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women.

On Sat, 2/15/14, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:

 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
   
   
   You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
 twisted footsteps.
  not
 surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
 master's foot steps - there are others who have like Bob
 Fickes 
 
  On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stanley@...
 j_alexander_stanley@...
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board
 Ruling
 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Interesting... when you posted earlier this
 
 morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one
 
 thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked
 
 therapist self-description he uses to promote
 himself.
 
 I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the
 
 consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of
 
 honor. Strange guy, that one.
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 
 jchwelch@... wrote:
 
 
 
 Thanks for the
 
 kind words Anne. Of
 
 course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of
 
 the brief outline.IMO (and others who were
 
 involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has
 
 harmed more than one person, including at least three
 
 ex-clients. From Knapp's online public
 
 displays, he has claimed he lost his license over at least
 a
 
 year ago (and that due to a lawsuit), though that isn't
 
 the case because the ruling wasn't made until January,
 
 2014, and there was never a lawsuit. Regardless, Knapp
 seems
 
 to wear a lost license (or as he publicly describes himself
 
 as a defrocked therapist) as a badge of being a
 
 rebel, or something. At least now, there is a public
 
 official ruling which will make it difficult for him to get
 
 licensed again if he ever would have an interest in doing
 
 so.Thanks again. Hope you and the horses are
 
 well. :-) 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread Richard J. Williams

On 2/15/2014 11:16 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
*It's excellent news that Knapp will no longer be able to use that 
license in a professional capacity *


We got rid of John Knapp, now all we have to do is get rid of the 
impostor Michael Jackson. Maybe MJ could go over to posting with Mike 
Dougheny and Robin Carlsen at TM-Free. LoL!


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread anartaxius
I knew John Knapp , but not well, and it was before he left the TM movement by 
a number of years, so he was still a 'good little boy' then. My knowledge of 
him therefore does not have relevance to Carol's situation which I am glad 
seems to have been resolved in her favour, though she still has to deal with 
the memories. 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, mjackson74@... wrote:

 I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women.
 
 On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... 
mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
 twisted footsteps.
  not
 surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
 master's foot steps - there are others who have like Bob
 Fickes 
 
 On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stanley@...
 j_alexander_stanley@...
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board
 Ruling
 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Interesting... when you posted earlier this
 
 morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one
 
 thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked
 
 therapist self-description he uses to promote
 himself.
 
 I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the
 
 consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of
 
 honor. Strange guy, that one.
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 
 jchwelch@... wrote:
 
 
 
 Thanks for the
 
 kind words Anne. Of
 
 course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of
 
 the brief outline.IMO (and others who were
 
 involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has
 
 harmed more than one person, including at least three
 
 ex-clients. From Knapp's online public
 
 displays, he has claimed he lost his license over at least
 a
 
 year ago (and that due to a lawsuit), though that isn't
 
 the case because the ruling wasn't made until January,
 
 2014, and there was never a lawsuit. Regardless, Knapp
 seems
 
 to wear a lost license (or as he publicly describes himself
 
 as a defrocked therapist) as a badge of being a
 
 rebel, or something. At least now, there is a public
 
 official ruling which will make it difficult for him to get
 
 licensed again if he ever would have an interest in doing
 
 so.Thanks again. Hope you and the horses are
 
 well. :-) 



Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread authfriend
OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, actually. I 
don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I understand it, hers 
was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind Share 
fantasized from Robin). 

  I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women.  

 On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... 
mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
 twisted footsteps.
  not
 surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
 master's foot steps - there are others who have like Bob
 Fickes 
 
 On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stanley@...
 j_alexander_stanley@...
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board
 Ruling
 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Interesting... when you posted earlier this
 
 morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one
 
 thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked
 
 therapist self-description he uses to promote
 himself.
 
 I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the
 
 consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of
 
 honor. Strange guy, that one.
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 
 jchwelch@... wrote:
 
 
 
 Thanks for the
 
 kind words Anne. Of
 
 course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of
 
 the brief outline.IMO (and others who were
 
 involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has
 
 harmed more than one person, including at least three
 
 ex-clients. From Knapp's online public
 
 displays, he has claimed he lost his license over at least
 a
 
 year ago (and that due to a lawsuit), though that isn't
 
 the case because the ruling wasn't made until January,
 
 2014, and there was never a lawsuit. Regardless, Knapp
 seems
 
 to wear a lost license (or as he publicly describes himself
 
 as a defrocked therapist) as a badge of being a
 
 rebel, or something. At least now, there is a public
 
 official ruling which will make it difficult for him to get
 
 licensed again if he ever would have an interest in doing
 
 so.Thanks again. Hope you and the horses are
 
 well. :-) 




Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread authfriend
I should add: It's kind of sad. From what I read on TM-Free back when Knapp was 
running it, he had a considerable degree of psychological insight and gave some 
good advice to folks struggling with their TM experience. 

  OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, 
actually. I don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I 
understand it, hers was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed 
to the kind Share fantasized from Robin).  

  I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women.  

 On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... 
mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
 twisted footsteps.
  not
 surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
 master's foot steps - there are others who have like Bob
 Fickes 
 
 On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stanley@...
 j_alexander_stanley@...
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board
 Ruling
 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Interesting... when you posted earlier this
 
 morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one
 
 thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked
 
 therapist self-description he uses to promote
 himself.
 
 I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the
 
 consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of
 
 honor. Strange guy, that one.
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 
 jchwelch@... wrote:
 
 
 
 Thanks for the
 
 kind words Anne. Of
 
 course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of
 
 the brief outline.IMO (and others who were
 
 involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has
 
 harmed more than one person, including at least three
 
 ex-clients. From Knapp's online public
 
 displays, he has claimed he lost his license over at least
 a
 
 year ago (and that due to a lawsuit), though that isn't
 
 the case because the ruling wasn't made until January,
 
 2014, and there was never a lawsuit. Regardless, Knapp
 seems
 
 to wear a lost license (or as he publicly describes himself
 
 as a defrocked therapist) as a badge of being a
 
 rebel, or something. At least now, there is a public
 
 official ruling which will make it difficult for him to get
 
 licensed again if he ever would have an interest in doing
 
 so.Thanks again. Hope you and the horses are
 
 well. :-) 







Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread Share Long
Judy, based on my own experience and the validation I received from several who 
experienced Robin in person, I am confident of the validity of what I accused 
Robin of.





On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:14 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com 
authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
  
OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, actually. I 
don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I understand it, hers 
was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind Share 
fantasized from Robin).

 I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women. 


On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote:

Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
















 









You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
twisted footsteps.
 not
surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
master's foot steps - there are others who have like Bob
Fickes 

On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stanley@...
j_alexander_stanley@...
wrote:



Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board
Ruling

To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com

Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM

































 



















Interesting... when you posted earlier this

morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one

thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked

therapist self-description he uses to promote
himself.

I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the

consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of

honor. Strange guy, that one.





---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,

jchwelch@... wrote:



Thanks for the

kind words Anne. Of

course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of

the brief outline.IMO (and others who were

involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has

harmed more than one person, including at least three

ex-clients. From Knapp's online public

displays, he has claimed he lost his license over at least
a

year ago (and that due to a lawsuit), though that isn't

the case because the ruling wasn't made until January,

2014, and there was never a lawsuit. Regardless, Knapp
seems

to wear a lost license (or as he publicly describes himself

as a defrocked therapist) as a badge of being a

rebel, or something. At least now, there is a public

official ruling which will make it difficult for him to get

licensed again if he ever would have an interest in doing

so.Thanks again. Hope you and the horses are

well. :-) 


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread anartaxius
Ah, if Robin was a therapist, I think it would safer to load all six chambers 
of a revolver, put it to your head, and pull  the trigger.

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread Share Long
Xeno, it was Judy who implied a comparison between Robin and the therapist 
Knapp. Probably she was just being a troll!





On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:48 PM, anartax...@yahoo.com 
anartax...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
  
Ah, if Robin was a therapist, I think it would safer to load all six chambers 
of a revolver, put it to your head, and pull  the trigger.


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread authfriend
I'm sure you're confident, Share. Unfortunately, that doesn't change the 
picture. The people you spoke to knew Robin 30+ years ago, when he was quite a 
different person and did a lot of harm, and they had plenty of motivation to 
encourage you to believe he had mistreated you. We didn't see any such thing 
here, not even remotely; if anything, the reverse was the case. I stand by my 
contention that psychological rape was your malignant fantasy (as several 
others here asserted as well). 

  Judy, based on my own experience and the validation I received from several 
who experienced Robin in person, I am confident of the validity of what I 
accused Robin of.  

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:14 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, actually. 
I don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I understand it, 
hers was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind 
Share fantasized from Robin).
 

  I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women.  

 On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... 
mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
 twisted footsteps.
  not
 surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
 master's foot steps - there are others who have like Bob
 Fickes 
 
 On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stanley@...
 j_alexander_stanley@...
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board
 Ruling
 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Interesting... when you posted earlier this
 
 morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one
 
 thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked
 
 therapist self-description he uses to promote
 himself.
 
 I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the
 
 consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of
 
 honor. Strange guy, that one.
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 
 jchwelch@... wrote:
 
 
 
 Thanks for the
 
 kind words Anne. Of
 
 course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of
 
 the brief outline.IMO (and others who were
 
 involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has
 
 harmed more than one person, including at least three
 
 ex-clients. From Knapp's online public
 
 displays, he has claimed he lost his license over at least
 a
 
 year ago (and that due to a lawsuit), though that isn't
 
 the case because the ruling wasn't made until January,
 
 2014, and there was never a lawsuit. Regardless, Knapp
 seems
 
 to wear a lost license (or as he publicly describes himself
 
 as a defrocked therapist) as a badge of being a
 
 rebel, or something. At least now, there is a public
 
 official ruling which will make it difficult for him to get
 
 licensed again if he ever would have an interest in doing
 
 so.Thanks again. Hope you and the horses are
 
 well. :-) 



 


 













Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread authfriend
Says Xeno the Troll, who is into saying extremely ugly things these days, and 
has not the vaguest notion of what kind of therapist Robin might have been 
(now, not 30 years ago). (Ironically, Xeno has convinced himself that he's in a 
position to advance FFLers' spiritual development by, among other things, 
attempting to push their buttons.) 

  Ah, if Robin was a therapist, I think it would safer to load all six 
chambers of a revolver, put it to your head, and pull  the trigger. 


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread Share Long
Judy, the people who agreed with you were the ones who usually agree with you. 
Whereas the people from outside FFL who supported me purposefully came onto FFL 
to do so and had zero motivation to do so, other than to validate what I had 
said and thus offer support. I believe Ann remains friends with some of those 
people and I doubt she would do so if they had negative intentions towards 
Robin. As well, there are people on FFL who understood what I meant by my 
accusation and did not find it malign.





On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:53 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com 
authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
  
I'm sure you're confident, Share. Unfortunately, that doesn't change the 
picture. The people you spoke to knew Robin 30+ years ago, when he was quite a 
different person and did a lot of harm, and they had plenty of motivation to 
encourage you to believe he had mistreated you. We didn't see any such thing 
here, not even remotely; if anything, the reverse was the case. I stand by my 
contention that psychological rape was your malignant fantasy (as several 
others here asserted as well).

 Judy, based on my own experience and the validation I received from several 
who experienced Robin in person, I am confident of the validity of what I 
accused Robin of. 





On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:14 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote:

 
OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, actually. I 
don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I understand it, hers 
was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind Share 
fantasized from Robin).

 I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women. 


On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote:

Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
















 









You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
twisted footsteps.
 not
surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
master's foot steps - there are others who have like Bob
Fickes 

On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stanley@...
j_alexander_stanley@...
wrote:



Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board
Ruling

To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com

Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM

































 



















Interesting... when you posted earlier this

morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one

thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked

therapist self-description he uses to promote
himself.

I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the

consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of

honor. Strange guy, that one.





---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,

jchwelch@... wrote:



Thanks for the

kind words Anne. Of

course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of

the brief outline.IMO (and others who were

involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has

harmed more than one person, including at least three

ex-clients. From Knapp's online public

displays, he has claimed he lost his license over at least
a

year ago (and that due to a lawsuit), though that isn't

the case because the ruling wasn't made until January,

2014, and there was never a lawsuit. Regardless, Knapp
seems

to wear a lost license (or as he publicly describes himself

as a defrocked therapist) as a badge of being a

rebel, or something. At least now, there is a public

official ruling which will make it difficult for him to get

licensed again if he ever would have an interest in doing

so.Thanks again. Hope you and the horses are

well. :-) 




Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread Share Long
Judy, you are the troll in this situation, for bringing Robin and me into the 
thread about Carol and Knapp. 





On Saturday, February 15, 2014 4:00 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com 
authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
  
Says Xeno the Troll, who is into saying extremely ugly things these days, and 
has not the vaguest notion of what kind of therapist Robin might have been 
(now, not 30 years ago). (Ironically, Xeno has convinced himself that he's in a 
position to advance FFLers' spiritual development by, among other things, 
attempting to push their buttons.)

 Ah, if Robin was a therapist, I think it would safer to load all six 
chambers of a revolver, put it to your head, and pull  the trigger. 


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread authfriend
The folks here who saw you misuse the term psychological rape for your own 
malign ends might well have thought you invented it and therefore might have 
been suspicious of Carol's account. I wanted to ensure they didn't make that 
mistake. 

  Judy, you are the troll in this situation, for bringing Robin and me into 
the thread about Carol and Knapp.  

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 4:00 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   Says Xeno the Troll, who is into saying extremely ugly things these days, 
and has not the vaguest notion of what kind of therapist Robin might have been 
(now, not 30 years ago). (Ironically, Xeno has convinced himself that he's in a 
position to advance FFLers' spiritual development by, among other things, 
attempting to push their buttons.)
 

  Ah, if Robin was a therapist, I think it would safer to load all six 
chambers of a revolver, put it to your head, and pull  the trigger. 

 


 













Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread Share Long
Judy, I find the people on FFL to be intelligent and well read and I highly 
doubt that anyone here thought I invented the term. Nor do I think they would 
be suspicious of Carol regardless of what they thought of me. 




On Saturday, February 15, 2014 4:20 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com 
authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
  
The folks here who saw you misuse the term psychological rape for your own 
malign ends might well have thought you invented it and therefore might have 
been suspicious of Carol's account. I wanted to ensure they didn't make that 
mistake.

 Judy, you are the troll in this situation, for bringing Robin and me into 
the thread about Carol and Knapp. 





On Saturday, February 15, 2014 4:00 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote:

 
Says Xeno the Troll, who is into saying extremely ugly things these days, and 
has not the vaguest notion of what kind of therapist Robin might have been 
(now, not 30 years ago). (Ironically, Xeno has convinced himself that he's in a 
position to advance FFLers' spiritual development by, among other things, 
attempting to push their buttons.)

 Ah, if Robin was a therapist, I think it would safer to load all six 
chambers of a revolver, put it to your head, and pull  the trigger. 




Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread authfriend
Oh, yes, right, the old Barry canard: people who express the same views I do 
about something don't think for themselves and just follow my lead in hopes 
that I'll praise them, no matter what I say. That never carried any weight, and 
it hasn't improved with age. 

 Of course those people who came onto FFL (how many were there, exactly? We 
know about Lord Knows and Bill and Brahmi; any others?) had the motivation to 
take revenge on Robin after what he'd done to them 30 years ago.
 

 I'll let Ann respond to your suppositions about her, but I'd be astonished if 
she would break off a friendship because the friend had negative intentions 
toward Robin. She's a bigger person than that.
 

 And yes, there were people here who were sufficiently at odds with today's 
Robin that they would encourage you to do him dirt by accusing him unfairly 
(including Xeno).
 

  Judy, the people who agreed with you were the ones who usually agree with 
you. Whereas the people from outside FFL who supported me purposefully came 
onto FFL to do so and had zero motivation to do so, other than to validate what 
I had said and thus offer support. I believe Ann remains friends with some of 
those people and I doubt she would do so if they had negative intentions 
towards Robin. As well, there are people on FFL who understood what I meant by 
my accusation and did not find it malign. 
 

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:53 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   I'm sure you're confident, Share. Unfortunately, that doesn't change the 
picture. The people you spoke to knew Robin 30+ years ago, when he was quite a 
different person and did a lot of harm, and they had plenty of motivation to 
encourage you to believe he had mistreated you. We didn't see any such thing 
here, not even remotely; if anything, the reverse was the case. I stand by my 
contention that psychological rape was your malignant fantasy (as several 
others here asserted as well).
 

  Judy, based on my own experience and the validation I received from several 
who experienced Robin in person, I am confident of the validity of what I 
accused Robin of.  

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:14 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, actually. 
I don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I understand it, 
hers was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind 
Share fantasized from Robin).
 

  I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women.  

 On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... 
mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
 twisted footsteps.
  not
 surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
 master's foot steps - there are others who have like Bob
 Fickes 
 
 On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stanley@...
 j_alexander_stanley@...
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board
 Ruling
 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Interesting... when you posted earlier this
 
 morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one
 
 thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked
 
 therapist self-description he uses to promote
 himself.
 
 I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the
 
 consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of
 
 honor. Strange guy, that one.
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 
 jchwelch@... wrote:
 
 
 
 Thanks for the
 
 kind words Anne. Of
 
 course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of
 
 the brief outline.IMO (and others who were
 
 involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has
 
 harmed more than one person, including at least three
 
 ex-clients. From Knapp's online public
 
 displays, he has claimed he lost his license over at least
 a
 
 year ago (and that due to a lawsuit), though that isn't
 
 the case because the ruling wasn't made until January,
 
 2014, and there was never a lawsuit. Regardless, Knapp
 seems
 
 to wear a lost license (or as he publicly describes himself
 
 as a defrocked therapist) as a badge of being a
 
 rebel, or something. At least now, there is a public
 
 official ruling which will make it difficult for him

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread Michael Jackson
I do on occasion. 

On Sat, 2/15/14, Richard J. Williams pundits...@gmail.com wrote:

 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 8:54 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
   
   
   
   
   
 On 2/15/2014
 11:16 AM,
   authfri...@yahoo.com
 wrote:
 
 
 It's
 excellent news that Knapp will no longer be able to
 use that
 license in a professional capacity 
 
 
 We got rid of John Knapp, now all we have to do is get
 rid of the
 impostor Michael Jackson. Maybe MJ could go over to
 posting with
 Mike Dougheny and Robin Carlsen at TM-Free. LoL!
 
   
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread Michael Jackson
what do you think Marsh's gals felt when he used 'em - bliss? I know some did. 
at least Judith Borque says she was happy and all that - but all of them???

On Sat, 2/15/14, authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:

 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 9:14 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
   
   
   OK. I'm not
 aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp,
 actually. I don't believe that was the problem Carol had
 with him. As I understand it, hers was more a matter of
 genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind Share
 fantasized from Robin).
  I read
 plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients
 began to complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself
 and he certainly did use Marshy's playbook in some
 respects to get his hands on women. 
 
  On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... authfriend@...
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing
 Board Ruling
 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
 
 twisted footsteps.
 
  not
 
 surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
 
 master's foot steps - there are others who have like
 Bob
 
 Fickes 
 
 
 
 On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stanley@...
 
 j_alexander_stanley@...
 
 wrote:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board
 
 Ruling
 
 
 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
 
 
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Interesting... when you posted earlier this
 
 
 
 morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one
 
 
 
 thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked
 
 
 
 therapist self-description he uses to promote
 
 himself.
 
 
 
 I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the
 
 
 
 consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of
 
 
 
 honor. Strange guy, that one.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 
 
 
 jchwelch@... wrote:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Thanks for the
 
 
 
 kind words Anne. Of
 
 
 
 course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of
 
 
 
 the brief outline.IMO (and others who were
 
 
 
 involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has
 
 
 
 harmed more than one person, including at least three
 
 
 
 ex-clients. From Knapp's online public
 
 
 
 displays, he has claimed he lost his license over at least
 
 a
 
 
 
 year ago (and that due to a lawsuit), though that isn't
 
 
 
 the case because the ruling wasn't made until January,
 
 
 
 2014, and there was never a lawsuit. Regardless, Knapp
 
 seems
 
 
 
 to wear a lost license (or as he publicly describes himself
 
 
 
 as a defrocked therapist) as a badge of being a
 
 
 
 rebel, or something. At least now, there is a public
 
 
 
 official ruling which will make it difficult for him to get
 
 
 
 licensed again if he ever would have an interest in doing
 
 
 
 so.Thanks again. Hope you and the horses are
 
 
 
 well. :-) 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread authfriend
Huh? What are you responding to in my post? I can't make the connection. I 
didn't say anything about how the women Maharishi played around with felt. 

  what do you think Marsh's gals felt when he used 'em - bliss? I know some 
did. at least Judith Borque says she was happy and all that - but all of 
them???  
 On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... 
mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 9:14 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 OK. I'm not
 aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp,
 actually. I don't believe that was the problem Carol had
 with him. As I understand it, hers was more a matter of
 genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind Share
 fantasized from Robin).
  I read
 plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients
 began to complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself
 and he certainly did use Marshy's playbook in some
 respects to get his hands on women. 
 
 On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... authfriend@...
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing
 Board Ruling
 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
 
 twisted footsteps.
 
  not
 
 surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
 
 master's foot steps - there are others who have like
 Bob
 
 Fickes 
 
 
 
 On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stanley@...
 
 j_alexander_stanley@...
 
 wrote:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board
 
 Ruling
 
 
 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
 
 
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Interesting... when you posted earlier this
 
 
 
 morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one
 
 
 
 thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked
 
 
 
 therapist self-description he uses to promote
 
 himself.
 
 
 
 I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the
 
 
 
 consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of
 
 
 
 honor. Strange guy, that one.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 
 
 
 jchwelch@... wrote:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Thanks for the
 
 
 
 kind words Anne. Of
 
 
 
 course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of
 
 
 
 the brief outline.IMO (and others who were
 
 
 
 involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has
 
 
 
 harmed more than one person, including at least three
 
 
 
 ex-clients. From Knapp's online public
 
 
 
 displays, he has claimed he lost his license over at least
 
 a
 
 
 
 year ago (and that due to a lawsuit), though that isn't
 
 
 
 the case because the ruling wasn't made until January,
 
 
 
 2014, and there was never a lawsuit. Regardless, Knapp
 
 seems
 
 
 
 to wear a lost license (or as he publicly describes himself
 
 
 
 as a defrocked therapist) as a badge of being a
 
 
 
 rebel, or something. At least now, there is a public
 
 
 
 official ruling which will make it difficult for him to get
 
 
 
 licensed again if he ever would have an interest in doing
 
 
 
 so.Thanks again. Hope you and the horses are
 
 
 
 well. :-) 




Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread Richard J. Williams
On 2/15/2014 4:43 PM, Michael Jackson wrote:
 what do you think Marsh's gals felt when he used 'em - bliss?
 
Why would you be wanting to know?


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread authfriend
We disagree that they might have found your accusation so impossibly 
unjustified that they would have become suspicious of anyone who used it. 
Remember, everybody here saw what went on between you and Robin. 

  Judy, I find the people on FFL to be intelligent and well read and I highly 
doubt that anyone here thought I invented the term. Nor do I think they would 
be suspicious of Carol regardless of what they thought of me.  
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 4:20 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   The folks here who saw you misuse the term psychological rape for your own 
malign ends might well have thought you invented it and therefore might have 
been suspicious of Carol's account. I wanted to ensure they didn't make that 
mistake.
 

  Judy, you are the troll in this situation, for bringing Robin and me into 
the thread about Carol and Knapp.  

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 4:00 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   Says Xeno the Troll, who is into saying extremely ugly things these days, 
and has not the vaguest notion of what kind of therapist Robin might have been 
(now, not 30 years ago). (Ironically, Xeno has convinced himself that he's in a 
position to advance FFLers' spiritual development by, among other things, 
attempting to push their buttons.)
 

  Ah, if Robin was a therapist, I think it would safer to load all six 
chambers of a revolver, put it to your head, and pull  the trigger. 

 















 


 














Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread Richard J. Williams

On 2/15/2014 4:47 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
I didn't say anything about how the women Maharishi played around with 
felt.


There sure are a lot of trolls on FFL today. Go figure.

It's a cry for help for sure: A FFL troll disrupting a conversation 
about the trolls that post to TM-Free.  Probably a sure indication of 
some past disturbing situations regarding family, relationships, 
substances, teachers and schools. Go figure.


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread steve.sundur
Sounds like the table's' been set for the next two weeks!
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote:

 Says Xeno the Troll, who is into saying extremely ugly things these days, and 
has not the vaguest notion of what kind of therapist Robin might have been 
(now, not 30 years ago). (Ironically, Xeno has convinced himself that he's in a 
position to advance FFLers' spiritual development by, among other things, 
attempting to push their buttons.) 

  Ah, if Robin was a therapist, I think it would safer to load all six 
chambers of a revolver, put it to your head, and pull  the trigger. 




Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread Share Long
Judy, I don't think that Bill and Brahmi and Lord Knows were trying to get 
revenge on Robin. First of all, I also know Bill in person and he is not that 
kind of person. Plus, none of their posts sounded revengeful to me.

As for the FFL regulars, some were supportive of me but no one encouraged me to 
accuse Robin.

I also want to make the point that Emily posted some definitions of the term 
psychological rape so again, I'm quite sure that no one on FFL thought that I 
coined the term.




On Saturday, February 15, 2014 4:34 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com 
authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
  
Oh, yes, right, the old Barry canard: people who express the same views I do 
about something don't think for themselves and just follow my lead in hopes 
that I'll praise them, no matter what I say. That never carried any weight, and 
it hasn't improved with age.

Of course those people who came onto FFL (how many were there, exactly? We know 
about Lord Knows and Bill and Brahmi; any others?) had the motivation to take 
revenge on Robin after what he'd done to them 30 years ago.

I'll let Ann respond to your suppositions about her, but I'd be astonished if 
she would break off a friendship because the friend had negative intentions 
toward Robin. She's a bigger person than that.

And yes, there were people here who were sufficiently at odds with today's 
Robin that they would encourage you to do him dirt by accusing him unfairly 
(including Xeno).

 Judy, the people who agreed with you were the ones who usually agree with 
you. Whereas the people from outside FFL who supported me purposefully came 
onto FFL to do so and had zero motivation to do so, other than to validate what 
I had said and thus offer support. I believe Ann remains friends with some of 
those people and I doubt she would do so if they had negative intentions 
towards Robin. As well, there are people on FFL who understood what I meant by 
my accusation and did not find it malign. 





On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:53 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote:

 
I'm sure you're confident, Share. Unfortunately, that doesn't change the 
picture. The people you spoke to knew Robin 30+ years ago, when he was quite a 
different person and did a lot of harm, and they had plenty of motivation to 
encourage you to believe he had mistreated you. We didn't see any such thing 
here, not even remotely; if anything, the reverse was the case. I stand by my 
contention that psychological rape was your malignant fantasy (as several 
others here asserted as well).

 Judy, based on my own experience and the validation I received from several 
who experienced Robin in person, I am confident of the validity of what I 
accused
Robin of. 





On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:14 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote:

 
OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, actually. I 
don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I understand it, hers 
was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind Share 
fantasized from Robin).

 I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women. 


On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote:

Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
















 









You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
twisted footsteps.
 not
surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
master's foot steps - there are others who have like Bob
Fickes 

On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stanley@...
j_alexander_stanley@...
wrote:



Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board
Ruling

To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com

Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM

































 



















Interesting... when you posted earlier this

morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one

thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked

therapist self-description he uses to promote
himself.

I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the

consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of

honor. Strange guy, that one.





---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,

jchwelch@... wrote:



Thanks for the

kind words Anne. Of

course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of

the brief outline.IMO (and others who were

involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has

harmed more than one person, including at least three

ex-clients. From Knapp's online public

displays, he has claimed he lost his license over at least
a

year ago (and that due to a lawsuit), though that isn't

the case because the ruling wasn't made until January,

2014, and there was never

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread Share Long
Judy, I bet a lot of people on FFL did not even read a lot of those posts so I 
very much doubt the validity of your statement that everybody here saw what 
went on between you and Robin.






On Saturday, February 15, 2014 4:48 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com 
authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
  
We disagree that they might have found your accusation so impossibly 
unjustified that they would have become suspicious of anyone who used it. 
Remember, everybody here saw what went on between you and Robin.

 Judy, I find the people on FFL to be intelligent and well read and I highly 
doubt that anyone here thought I invented the term. Nor do I think they would 
be suspicious of Carol regardless of what they thought of me. 



On Saturday, February 15, 2014 4:20 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote:

 
The folks here who saw you misuse the term psychological rape for your own 
malign ends might well have thought you invented it and therefore might have 
been suspicious of Carol's account. I wanted to ensure they didn't make that 
mistake.

 Judy, you are the troll in this situation, for bringing Robin and me into 
the thread about Carol and Knapp. 





On Saturday, February 15, 2014 4:00 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote:

 
Says Xeno the Troll, who is into saying extremely ugly things these days, and 
has not the vaguest notion of what kind of therapist Robin might have been 
(now, not 30 years ago). (Ironically, Xeno has convinced himself that he's in a 
position to advance FFLers' spiritual development by, among other things, 
attempting to push their buttons.)

 Ah, if Robin was a therapist, I think it would safer to load all six 
chambers of a revolver, put it to your head, and pull  the trigger. 






Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread Richard J. Williams
On 2/15/2014 7:13 PM, Share Long wrote:
 Judy, I bet a lot of people on FFL did not even read a lot of those 
 posts so I very much doubt the validity of your statement that 
 everybody here saw what went on between you and Robin.
 
We saw what was going on between Judy and Robin but most of us didn't 
take it seriously.


Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread authfriend
I can't help you with your fantasies, Share. You have far too much invested in 
them. Anyone who looked at Bill's book, or read Brahmi's post, knows they 
were out for Robin's blood. 

 Curtis certainly supported your accusations against Robin, even back when you 
were contradicting yourself right and left about what had happened and how you 
had felt about it. Even when you finally came up with the term psychological 
rape, you claimed that was what you had felt from the beginning, but at the 
time you had insisted you weren't upset, so one way or another, you weren't 
telling the truth. I documented all this in detail with quotes from your posts. 
Your various stories simply didn't add up.
 

 Long after the fact, you latched onto the term somehow and decided it would be 
a good one to beat Robin up with.
 

 And the real irony is that you misunderstood what Robin had said to you in the 
first place, as he very graciously attempted to explain to you--and went on to 
apologize for your having misunderstood him.
 

 Note that Emily looked up the term and found your application of it way, WAY 
out of line. It's not so much that you coined it as that you so misused it that 
it became meaningless. That's not the case with Carol. That was the point I 
wanted to make.
 
  Judy, I don't think that Bill and Brahmi and Lord Knows were trying to get 
revenge on Robin. First of all, I also know Bill in person and he is not that 
kind of person. Plus, none of their posts sounded revengeful to me.
 

 As for the FFL regulars, some were supportive of me but no one encouraged me 
to accuse Robin.
 

 I also want to make the point that Emily posted some definitions of the term 
psychological rape so again, I'm quite sure that no one on FFL thought that I 
coined the term. 

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 4:34 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   Oh, yes, right, the old Barry canard: people who express the same views I do 
about something don't think for themselves and just follow my lead in hopes 
that I'll praise them, no matter what I say. That never carried any weight, and 
it hasn't improved with age.
 

 Of course those people who came onto FFL (how many were there, exactly? We 
know about Lord Knows and Bill and Brahmi; any others?) had the motivation to 
take revenge on Robin after what he'd done to them 30 years ago.
 

 I'll let Ann respond to your suppositions about her, but I'd be astonished if 
she would break off a friendship because the friend had negative intentions 
toward Robin. She's a bigger person than that.
 

 And yes, there were people here who were sufficiently at odds with today's 
Robin that they would encourage you to do him dirt by accusing him unfairly 
(including Xeno).
 

  Judy, the people who agreed with you were the ones who usually agree with 
you. Whereas the people from outside FFL who supported me purposefully came 
onto FFL to do so and had zero motivation to do so, other than to validate what 
I had said and thus offer support. I believe Ann remains friends with some of 
those people and I doubt she would do so if they had negative intentions 
towards Robin. As well, there are people on FFL who understood what I meant by 
my accusation and did not find it malign. 
 

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:53 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   I'm sure you're confident, Share. Unfortunately, that doesn't change the 
picture. The people you spoke to knew Robin 30+ years ago, when he was quite a 
different person and did a lot of harm, and they had plenty of motivation to 
encourage you to believe he had mistreated you. We didn't see any such thing 
here, not even remotely; if anything, the reverse was the case. I stand by my 
contention that psychological rape was your malignant fantasy (as several 
others here asserted as well).
 

  Judy, based on my own experience and the validation I received from several 
who experienced Robin in person, I am confident of the validity of what I 
accused Robin of.  

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:14 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, actually. 
I don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I understand it, 
hers was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind 
Share fantasized from Robin).
 

  I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women.  

 On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... 
mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 You

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread awoelflebater

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:

 Judy, the people who agreed with you were the ones who usually agree with you. 
Whereas the people from outside FFL who supported me purposefully came onto FFL 
to do so and had zero motivation to do so, other than to validate what I had 
said and thus offer support. I believe Ann remains friends with some of those 
people and I doubt she would do so if they had negative intentions towards 
Robin. As well, there are people on FFL who understood what I meant by my 
accusation and did not find it malign.
 

 I'll just clarify this one point, Share. It makes absolutely no difference to 
me how my friends feel about Robin, whether they love him or hate him, they are 
still my friends independent of their personal opinions about him. I believe 
that you and and Barry overestimate my attachment to this man. In fact, I know 
you both do since you think I am part of his cult.
 

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:53 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   I'm sure you're confident, Share. Unfortunately, that doesn't change the 
picture. The people you spoke to knew Robin 30+ years ago, when he was quite a 
different person and did a lot of harm, and they had plenty of motivation to 
encourage you to believe he had mistreated you. We didn't see any such thing 
here, not even remotely; if anything, the reverse was the case. I stand by my 
contention that psychological rape was your malignant fantasy (as several 
others here asserted as well).
 

  Judy, based on my own experience and the validation I received from several 
who experienced Robin in person, I am confident of the validity of what I 
accused Robin of.  

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:14 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, actually. 
I don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I understand it, 
hers was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind 
Share fantasized from Robin).
 

  I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women.  

 On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... 
mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
 twisted footsteps.
  not
 surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
 master's foot steps - there are others who have like Bob
 Fickes 
 
 On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stanley@...
 j_alexander_stanley@...
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board
 Ruling
 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Interesting... when you posted earlier this
 
 morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one
 
 thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked
 
 therapist self-description he uses to promote
 himself.
 
 I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the
 
 consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of
 
 honor. Strange guy, that one.
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 
 jchwelch@... wrote:
 
 
 
 Thanks for the
 
 kind words Anne. Of
 
 course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of
 
 the brief outline.IMO (and others who were
 
 involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has
 
 harmed more than one person, including at least three
 
 ex-clients. From Knapp's online public
 
 displays, he has claimed he lost his license over at least
 a
 
 year ago (and that due to a lawsuit), though that isn't
 
 the case because the ruling wasn't made until January,
 
 2014, and there was never a lawsuit. Regardless, Knapp
 seems
 
 to wear a lost license (or as he publicly describes himself
 
 as a defrocked therapist) as a badge of being a
 
 rebel, or something. At least now, there is a public
 
 official ruling which will make it difficult for him to get
 
 licensed again if he ever would have an interest in doing
 
 so.Thanks again. Hope you and the horses are
 
 well. :-) 



 















 


 












Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread awoelflebater

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend@... wrote:

 Oh, yes, right, the old Barry canard: people who express the same views I do 
about something don't think for themselves and just follow my lead in hopes 
that I'll praise them, no matter what I say. That never carried any weight, and 
it hasn't improved with age. 

 Of course those people who came onto FFL (how many were there, exactly? We 
know about Lord Knows and Bill and Brahmi; any others?) had the motivation to 
take revenge on Robin after what he'd done to them 30 years ago.
 

 I'll let Ann respond to your suppositions about her, but I'd be astonished if 
she would break off a friendship because the friend had negative intentions 
toward Robin. She's a bigger person than that.
 

 I just saw this now, Judy, after having responded to Share's supposition.
 

 And yes, there were people here who were sufficiently at odds with today's 
Robin that they would encourage you to do him dirt by accusing him unfairly 
(including Xeno).
 

  Judy, the people who agreed with you were the ones who usually agree with 
you. Whereas the people from outside FFL who supported me purposefully came 
onto FFL to do so and had zero motivation to do so, other than to validate what 
I had said and thus offer support. I believe Ann remains friends with some of 
those people and I doubt she would do so if they had negative intentions 
towards Robin. As well, there are people on FFL who understood what I meant by 
my accusation and did not find it malign. 
 

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:53 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   I'm sure you're confident, Share. Unfortunately, that doesn't change the 
picture. The people you spoke to knew Robin 30+ years ago, when he was quite a 
different person and did a lot of harm, and they had plenty of motivation to 
encourage you to believe he had mistreated you. We didn't see any such thing 
here, not even remotely; if anything, the reverse was the case. I stand by my 
contention that psychological rape was your malignant fantasy (as several 
others here asserted as well).
 

  Judy, based on my own experience and the validation I received from several 
who experienced Robin in person, I am confident of the validity of what I 
accused Robin of.  

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:14 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, actually. 
I don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I understand it, 
hers was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind 
Share fantasized from Robin).
 

  I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women.  

 On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... 
mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
 twisted footsteps.
  not
 surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
 master's foot steps - there are others who have like Bob
 Fickes 
 
 On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stanley@...
 j_alexander_stanley@...
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board
 Ruling
 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Interesting... when you posted earlier this
 
 morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one
 
 thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked
 
 therapist self-description he uses to promote
 himself.
 
 I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the
 
 consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of
 
 honor. Strange guy, that one.
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 
 jchwelch@... wrote:
 
 
 
 Thanks for the
 
 kind words Anne. Of
 
 course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of
 
 the brief outline.IMO (and others who were
 
 involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has
 
 harmed more than one person, including at least three
 
 ex-clients. From Knapp's online public
 
 displays, he has claimed he lost his license over at least
 a
 
 year ago (and that due to a lawsuit), though that isn't
 
 the case because the ruling wasn't made until January,
 
 2014, and there was never a lawsuit. Regardless, Knapp
 seems
 
 to wear a lost license (or as he publicly describes himself
 
 as a defrocked

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread emilymaenot
Share, I posted a definition of emotional rape as I had never heard of the 
term psychological rape and so looked it up on the internet and yes, I 
thought you had made it up!  What I posted (note: different term) was not at 
all consistent with what you were asserting, which was my point.  What I asked 
*you* to do, in fact begged you to do, is post a definition of what it was that 
you were talking about.  You indicated that it meant attributing thoughts and 
feelings to you that you don't have.  Sorry, Share, if that is what you meant 
by PR, than accuse yourself of such a thing, as you've done this countless 
times, incorrectly, even as you persist now in what was proven and shown by 
your own self to be completely false in your case. Sorry, I'm not as well read 
as you. To me, it was clear that you had adopted this term for malign purposes, 
imho.  Now, I'm not here to fight with you, but wanted to correct your 
misinterpretation of what I posted back then.  
 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:

 Judy, I don't think that Bill and Brahmi and Lord Knows were trying to get 
revenge on Robin. First of all, I also know Bill in person and he is not that 
kind of person. Plus, none of their posts sounded revengeful to me.
 

 As for the FFL regulars, some were supportive of me but no one encouraged me 
to accuse Robin.
 

 I also want to make the point that Emily posted some definitions of the term 
psychological rape so again, I'm quite sure that no one on FFL thought that I 
coined the term.

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 4:34 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   Oh, yes, right, the old Barry canard: people who express the same views I do 
about something don't think for themselves and just follow my lead in hopes 
that I'll praise them, no matter what I say. That never carried any weight, and 
it hasn't improved with age.
 

 Of course those people who came onto FFL (how many were there, exactly? We 
know about Lord Knows and Bill and Brahmi; any others?) had the motivation to 
take revenge on Robin after what he'd done to them 30 years ago.
 

 I'll let Ann respond to your suppositions about her, but I'd be astonished if 
she would break off a friendship because the friend had negative intentions 
toward Robin. She's a bigger person than that.
 

 And yes, there were people here who were sufficiently at odds with today's 
Robin that they would encourage you to do him dirt by accusing him unfairly 
(including Xeno).
 

  Judy, the people who agreed with you were the ones who usually agree with 
you. Whereas the people from outside FFL who supported me purposefully came 
onto FFL to do so and had zero motivation to do so, other than to validate what 
I had said and thus offer support. I believe Ann remains friends with some of 
those people and I doubt she would do so if they had negative intentions 
towards Robin. As well, there are people on FFL who understood what I meant by 
my accusation and did not find it malign. 
 

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:53 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   I'm sure you're confident, Share. Unfortunately, that doesn't change the 
picture. The people you spoke to knew Robin 30+ years ago, when he was quite a 
different person and did a lot of harm, and they had plenty of motivation to 
encourage you to believe he had mistreated you. We didn't see any such thing 
here, not even remotely; if anything, the reverse was the case. I stand by my 
contention that psychological rape was your malignant fantasy (as several 
others here asserted as well).
 

  Judy, based on my own experience and the validation I received from several 
who experienced Robin in person, I am confident of the validity of what I 
accused Robin of.  

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:14 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, actually. 
I don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I understand it, 
hers was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind 
Share fantasized from Robin).
 

  I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women.  

 On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... 
mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
 twisted footsteps.
  not
 surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
 master's foot steps - there are others who have like Bob
 Fickes 
 
 On Sat, 2/15

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread Share Long
Emily, thanks for setting the record straight. It was a long time ago and I 
forgot. 





On Saturday, February 15, 2014 7:51 PM, emilymae...@yahoo.com 
emilymae...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
  
Share, I posted a definition of emotional rape as I had never heard of the 
term psychological rape and so looked it up on the internet and yes, I 
thought you had made it up!  What I posted (note: different term) was not at 
all consistent with what you were asserting, which was my point.  What I asked 
*you* to do, in fact begged you to do, is post a definition of what it was that 
you were talking about.  You indicated that it meant attributing thoughts and 
feelings to you that you don't have.  Sorry, Share, if that is what you meant 
by PR, than accuse yourself of such a thing, as you've done this countless 
times, incorrectly, even as you persist now in what was proven and shown by 
your own self to be completely false in your case. Sorry, I'm not as well read 
as you. To me, it was clear that you had adopted this term for malign purposes, 
imho.  Now, I'm not here to fight with you, but wanted to correct your 
misinterpretation of what I posted
 back then.  



---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:


Judy, I don't think that Bill and Brahmi and Lord Knows were trying to get 
revenge on Robin. First of all, I also know Bill in person and he is not that 
kind of person. Plus, none of their posts sounded revengeful to me.

As for the FFL regulars, some were supportive of me but no one encouraged me to 
accuse Robin.

I also want to make the point that Emily posted some definitions of the term 
psychological rape so again, I'm quite sure that no one on FFL thought that I 
coined the term.




On Saturday, February 15, 2014 4:34 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote:

 
Oh, yes, right, the old Barry canard: people who express the same views I do 
about something don't think for themselves and just follow my lead in hopes 
that I'll praise them, no matter what I say. That never carried any weight, and 
it hasn't improved with age.

Of course those people who came onto FFL (how many were there, exactly? We know 
about Lord Knows and Bill and Brahmi; any others?) had the motivation to take 
revenge on Robin after what he'd done to them 30 years ago.

I'll let Ann respond to your suppositions about her, but I'd be astonished if 
she would break off a friendship because the friend had negative intentions 
toward Robin. She's a bigger person than
that.

And yes, there were people here who were sufficiently at odds with today's 
Robin that they would encourage you to do him dirt by accusing him unfairly 
(including Xeno).

 Judy, the people who agreed with you were the ones who usually agree with 
you. Whereas the people from outside FFL who supported me purposefully came 
onto FFL to do so and had zero motivation to do so, other than to validate what 
I had said and thus offer support. I believe Ann remains friends with some of 
those people and I doubt she would do so if they had negative intentions 
towards Robin. As
well, there are people on FFL who understood what I meant by my accusation and 
did not find it malign. 





On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:53 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote:

 
I'm sure you're confident, Share. Unfortunately, that doesn't change the 
picture. The people you spoke to knew Robin 30+ years ago, when he was quite a 
different person and did a lot of harm, and they had plenty of motivation to 
encourage you to believe he had mistreated you. We didn't see any such thing 
here, not even remotely; if anything, the reverse was the case. I stand by my 
contention that psychological rape was your malignant fantasy (as several 
others here asserted as well).

 Judy, based on my own experience and the validation I received from several 
who experienced Robin in person, I am confident of the validity of what I 
accused
Robin of. 





On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:14 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote:

 
OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, actually. I 
don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I understand it, hers 
was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind Share 
fantasized from Robin).

 I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get
his hands on women. 


On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote:

Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
















 









You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
twisted footsteps.
 not
surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
master's foot steps - there are others who have like Bob
Fickes

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread awoelflebater

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emilymaenot@... wrote:

 Share, I posted a definition of emotional rape as I had never heard of the 
term psychological rape and so looked it up on the internet and yes, I 
thought you had made it up!  What I posted (note: different term) was not at 
all consistent with what you were asserting, which was my point.  What I asked 
*you* to do, in fact begged you to do, is post a definition of what it was that 
you were talking about.  You indicated that it meant attributing thoughts and 
feelings to you that you don't have.  Sorry, Share, if that is what you meant 
by PR, than accuse yourself of such a thing, as you've done this countless 
times, incorrectly, even as you persist now in what was proven and shown by 
your own self to be completely false in your case. Sorry, I'm not as well read 
as you. To me, it was clear that you had adopted this term for malign purposes, 
imho.  Now, I'm not here to fight with you, but wanted to correct your 
misinterpretation of what I posted back then.  
 

 Hi Em, nice to feel you here.
 

 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:

 Judy, I don't think that Bill and Brahmi and Lord Knows were trying to get 
revenge on Robin. First of all, I also know Bill in person and he is not that 
kind of person. Plus, none of their posts sounded revengeful to me.
 

 As for the FFL regulars, some were supportive of me but no one encouraged me 
to accuse Robin.
 

 I also want to make the point that Emily posted some definitions of the term 
psychological rape so again, I'm quite sure that no one on FFL thought that I 
coined the term.

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 4:34 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   Oh, yes, right, the old Barry canard: people who express the same views I do 
about something don't think for themselves and just follow my lead in hopes 
that I'll praise them, no matter what I say. That never carried any weight, and 
it hasn't improved with age.
 

 Of course those people who came onto FFL (how many were there, exactly? We 
know about Lord Knows and Bill and Brahmi; any others?) had the motivation to 
take revenge on Robin after what he'd done to them 30 years ago.
 

 I'll let Ann respond to your suppositions about her, but I'd be astonished if 
she would break off a friendship because the friend had negative intentions 
toward Robin. She's a bigger person than that.
 

 And yes, there were people here who were sufficiently at odds with today's 
Robin that they would encourage you to do him dirt by accusing him unfairly 
(including Xeno).
 

  Judy, the people who agreed with you were the ones who usually agree with 
you. Whereas the people from outside FFL who supported me purposefully came 
onto FFL to do so and had zero motivation to do so, other than to validate what 
I had said and thus offer support. I believe Ann remains friends with some of 
those people and I doubt she would do so if they had negative intentions 
towards Robin. As well, there are people on FFL who understood what I meant by 
my accusation and did not find it malign. 
 

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:53 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   I'm sure you're confident, Share. Unfortunately, that doesn't change the 
picture. The people you spoke to knew Robin 30+ years ago, when he was quite a 
different person and did a lot of harm, and they had plenty of motivation to 
encourage you to believe he had mistreated you. We didn't see any such thing 
here, not even remotely; if anything, the reverse was the case. I stand by my 
contention that psychological rape was your malignant fantasy (as several 
others here asserted as well).
 

  Judy, based on my own experience and the validation I received from several 
who experienced Robin in person, I am confident of the validity of what I 
accused Robin of.  

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:14 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, actually. 
I don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I understand it, 
hers was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind 
Share fantasized from Robin).
 

  I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women.  

 On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... 
mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
 twisted footsteps.
  not
 surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
 master's foot steps

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread authfriend
Thanks, Emily. I thought there was something fishy about Share's version, but I 
couldn't put my finger on it. 

 Share, I posted a definition of emotional rape as I had never heard of the 
term psychological rape and so looked it up on the internet and yes, I 
thought you had made it up!  What I posted (note: different term) was not at 
all consistent with what you were asserting, which was my point.  What I asked 
*you* to do, in fact begged you to do, is post a definition of what it was that 
you were talking about.  You indicated that it meant attributing thoughts and 
feelings to you that you don't have.  Sorry, Share, if that is what you meant 
by PR, than accuse yourself of such a thing, as you've done this countless 
times, incorrectly, even as you persist now in what was proven and shown by 
your own self to be completely false in your case. Sorry, I'm not as well read 
as you. To me, it was clear that you had adopted this term for malign purposes, 
imho.  Now, I'm not here to fight with you, but wanted to correct your 
misinterpretation of what I posted back then.   

 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:

 Judy, I don't think that Bill and Brahmi and Lord Knows were trying to get 
revenge on Robin. First of all, I also know Bill in person and he is not that 
kind of person. Plus, none of their posts sounded revengeful to me.
 

 As for the FFL regulars, some were supportive of me but no one encouraged me 
to accuse Robin.
 

 I also want to make the point that Emily posted some definitions of the term 
psychological rape so again, I'm quite sure that no one on FFL thought that I 
coined the term.

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 4:34 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   Oh, yes, right, the old Barry canard: people who express the same views I do 
about something don't think for themselves and just follow my lead in hopes 
that I'll praise them, no matter what I say. That never carried any weight, and 
it hasn't improved with age.
 

 Of course those people who came onto FFL (how many were there, exactly? We 
know about Lord Knows and Bill and Brahmi; any others?) had the motivation to 
take revenge on Robin after what he'd done to them 30 years ago.
 

 I'll let Ann respond to your suppositions about her, but I'd be astonished if 
she would break off a friendship because the friend had negative intentions 
toward Robin. She's a bigger person than that.
 

 And yes, there were people here who were sufficiently at odds with today's 
Robin that they would encourage you to do him dirt by accusing him unfairly 
(including Xeno).
 

  Judy, the people who agreed with you were the ones who usually agree with 
you. Whereas the people from outside FFL who supported me purposefully came 
onto FFL to do so and had zero motivation to do so, other than to validate what 
I had said and thus offer support. I believe Ann remains friends with some of 
those people and I doubt she would do so if they had negative intentions 
towards Robin. As well, there are people on FFL who understood what I meant by 
my accusation and did not find it malign. 
 

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:53 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   I'm sure you're confident, Share. Unfortunately, that doesn't change the 
picture. The people you spoke to knew Robin 30+ years ago, when he was quite a 
different person and did a lot of harm, and they had plenty of motivation to 
encourage you to believe he had mistreated you. We didn't see any such thing 
here, not even remotely; if anything, the reverse was the case. I stand by my 
contention that psychological rape was your malignant fantasy (as several 
others here asserted as well).
 

  Judy, based on my own experience and the validation I received from several 
who experienced Robin in person, I am confident of the validity of what I 
accused Robin of.  

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:14 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, actually. 
I don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I understand it, 
hers was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind 
Share fantasized from Robin).
 

  I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women.  

 On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... 
mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
 twisted footsteps.
  not
 surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
 master's

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread Share Long
Ann, you can lump me with turq all you want but that will lead to inaccurate 
conclusions as it does here. I haven't thought about any of this in a very long 
time, certainly not about whether you're in Robin's cult and or have an 
attachment to him.





On Saturday, February 15, 2014 7:44 PM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com 
awoelfleba...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
  




---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:


Judy, the people who agreed with you were the ones who usually agree with you. 
Whereas the people from outside FFL who supported me purposefully came onto FFL 
to do so and had zero motivation to do so, other than to validate what I had 
said and thus offer support. I believe Ann remains friends with some of those 
people and I doubt she would do so if they had negative intentions towards 
Robin. As well, there are people on FFL who understood what I meant by my 
accusation and did not find it malign.

I'll just clarify this one point, Share. It makes absolutely no difference to 
me how my friends feel about Robin, whether they love him or hate him, they are 
still my friends independent of their personal opinions about him. I believe 
that you and and Barry overestimate my attachment to this man. In fact, I know 
you both do since you think I am part of his cult.





On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:53 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote:

 
I'm sure you're confident, Share. Unfortunately, that doesn't change the 
picture. The people you spoke to knew Robin 30+ years ago, when he was quite a 
different person and did a lot of harm, and they had plenty of motivation to 
encourage you to believe he had mistreated you. We didn't see any such thing 
here, not even remotely; if anything, the reverse was the case. I stand by my 
contention that psychological rape was your malignant fantasy (as several 
others here asserted as well).

 Judy, based on my own experience and the validation I received from several 
who experienced Robin in person, I am confident of the validity of what I 
accused
Robin of. 





On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:14 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote:

 
OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, actually. I 
don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I understand it, hers 
was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind Share 
fantasized from Robin).

 I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women. 


On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... authfriend@... wrote:

Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
















 









You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
twisted footsteps.
 not
surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
master's foot steps - there are others who have like Bob
Fickes 

On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stanley@...
j_alexander_stanley@...
wrote:



Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board
Ruling

To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com

Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM

































 



















Interesting... when you posted earlier this

morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one

thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked

therapist self-description he uses to promote
himself.

I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the

consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of

honor. Strange guy, that one.





---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,

jchwelch@... wrote:



Thanks for the

kind words Anne. Of

course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of

the brief outline.IMO (and others who were

involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has

harmed more than one person, including at least three

ex-clients. From Knapp's online public

displays, he has claimed he lost his license over at least
a

year ago (and that due to a lawsuit), though that isn't

the case because the ruling wasn't made until January,

2014, and there was never a lawsuit. Regardless, Knapp
seems

to wear a lost license (or as he publicly describes himself

as a defrocked therapist) as a badge of being a

rebel, or something. At least now, there is a public

official ruling which will make it difficult for him to get

licensed again if he ever would have an interest in doing

so.Thanks again. Hope you and the horses are

well. :-) 






Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread emilymaenot

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote:

 
 

 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emilymaenot@... wrote:

 Share, I posted a definition of emotional rape as I had never heard of the 
term psychological rape and so looked it up on the internet and yes, I 
thought you had made it up!  What I posted (note: different term) was not at 
all consistent with what you were asserting, which was my point.  What I asked 
*you* to do, in fact begged you to do, is post a definition of what it was that 
you were talking about.  You indicated that it meant attributing thoughts and 
feelings to you that you don't have.  Sorry, Share, if that is what you meant 
by PR, than accuse yourself of such a thing, as you've done this countless 
times, incorrectly, even as you persist now in what was proven and shown by 
your own self to be completely false in your case. Sorry, I'm not as well read 
as you. To me, it was clear that you had adopted this term for malign purposes, 
imho.  Now, I'm not here to fight with you, but wanted to correct your 
misinterpretation of what I posted back then.  
 

 Hi Em, nice to feel you here.
 

 Ha ha ha.  That is so funny!
 

 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:

 Judy, I don't think that Bill and Brahmi and Lord Knows were trying to get 
revenge on Robin. First of all, I also know Bill in person and he is not that 
kind of person. Plus, none of their posts sounded revengeful to me.
 

 As for the FFL regulars, some were supportive of me but no one encouraged me 
to accuse Robin.
 

 I also want to make the point that Emily posted some definitions of the term 
psychological rape so again, I'm quite sure that no one on FFL thought that I 
coined the term.

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 4:34 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   Oh, yes, right, the old Barry canard: people who express the same views I do 
about something don't think for themselves and just follow my lead in hopes 
that I'll praise them, no matter what I say. That never carried any weight, and 
it hasn't improved with age.
 

 Of course those people who came onto FFL (how many were there, exactly? We 
know about Lord Knows and Bill and Brahmi; any others?) had the motivation to 
take revenge on Robin after what he'd done to them 30 years ago.
 

 I'll let Ann respond to your suppositions about her, but I'd be astonished if 
she would break off a friendship because the friend had negative intentions 
toward Robin. She's a bigger person than that.
 

 And yes, there were people here who were sufficiently at odds with today's 
Robin that they would encourage you to do him dirt by accusing him unfairly 
(including Xeno).
 

  Judy, the people who agreed with you were the ones who usually agree with 
you. Whereas the people from outside FFL who supported me purposefully came 
onto FFL to do so and had zero motivation to do so, other than to validate what 
I had said and thus offer support. I believe Ann remains friends with some of 
those people and I doubt she would do so if they had negative intentions 
towards Robin. As well, there are people on FFL who understood what I meant by 
my accusation and did not find it malign. 
 

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:53 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   I'm sure you're confident, Share. Unfortunately, that doesn't change the 
picture. The people you spoke to knew Robin 30+ years ago, when he was quite a 
different person and did a lot of harm, and they had plenty of motivation to 
encourage you to believe he had mistreated you. We didn't see any such thing 
here, not even remotely; if anything, the reverse was the case. I stand by my 
contention that psychological rape was your malignant fantasy (as several 
others here asserted as well).
 

  Judy, based on my own experience and the validation I received from several 
who experienced Robin in person, I am confident of the validity of what I 
accused Robin of.  

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:14 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, actually. 
I don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I understand it, 
hers was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind 
Share fantasized from Robin).
 

  I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women.  

 On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... 
mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread authfriend
Note the phrase, in Robin's cult, as if it were established fact that he has 
a cult. He doesn't, of course. But Share didn't choose her words by accident. 

 No matter how long it's been since Share thought about this, the fact is that 
she did accuse us of being in this imaginary Robin cult; and it wasn't all that 
long ago that Share insisted we were having an anniversary reaction when we 
objected to something she had said about Robin because the episode had happened 
around a year previously.
 

 She may not have mentioned it recently, but I seriously doubt she's changed 
her mind. Note that she doesn't say she has, and is still referring to Robin's 
cult as if it actually existed, so I think it's safe to assume she hasn't.
 

  Ann, you can lump me with turq all you want but that will lead to 
inaccurate conclusions as it does here. I haven't thought about any of this in 
a very long time, certainly not about whether you're in Robin's cult and or 
have an attachment to him.
 

 Judy, the people who agreed with you were the ones who usually agree with you. 
Whereas the people from outside FFL who supported me purposefully came onto FFL 
to do so and had zero motivation to do so, other than to validate what I had 
said and thus offer support. I believe Ann remains friends with some of those 
people and I doubt she would do so if they had negative intentions towards 
Robin. As well, there are people on FFL who understood what I meant by my 
accusation and did not find it malign.

 

 I'll just clarify this one point, Share. It makes absolutely no difference to 
me how my friends feel about Robin, whether they love him or hate him, they are 
still my friends independent of their personal opinions about him. I believe 
that you and and Barry overestimate my attachment to this man. In fact, I know 
you both do since you think I am part of his cult. 
 

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:53 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   I'm sure you're confident, Share. Unfortunately, that doesn't change the 
picture. The people you spoke to knew Robin 30+ years ago, when he was quite a 
different person and did a lot of harm, and they had plenty of motivation to 
encourage you to believe he had mistreated you. We didn't see any such thing 
here, not even remotely; if anything, the reverse was the case. I stand by my 
contention that psychological rape was your malignant fantasy (as several 
others here asserted as well).
 

  Judy, based on my own experience and the validation I received from several 
who experienced Robin in person, I am confident of the validity of what I 
accused Robin of.  

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:14 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, actually. 
I don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I understand it, 
hers was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind 
Share fantasized from Robin).
 

  I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women.  

 On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... 
mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
 twisted footsteps.
  not
 surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
 master's foot steps - there are others who have like Bob
 Fickes 
 
 On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stanley@...
 j_alexander_stanley@...
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board
 Ruling
 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Interesting... when you posted earlier this
 
 morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one
 
 thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked
 
 therapist self-description he uses to promote
 himself.
 
 I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the
 
 consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of
 
 honor. Strange guy, that one.
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 
 jchwelch@... wrote:
 
 
 
 Thanks for the
 
 kind words Anne. Of
 
 course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of
 
 the brief outline.IMO (and others who were
 
 involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has
 
 harmed more than one person, including at least three
 
 ex-clients. From

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread awoelflebater

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emilymaenot@... wrote:

 
 

 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, awoelflebater@... wrote:

 
 

 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, emilymaenot@... wrote:

 Share, I posted a definition of emotional rape as I had never heard of the 
term psychological rape and so looked it up on the internet and yes, I 
thought you had made it up!  What I posted (note: different term) was not at 
all consistent with what you were asserting, which was my point.  What I asked 
*you* to do, in fact begged you to do, is post a definition of what it was that 
you were talking about.  You indicated that it meant attributing thoughts and 
feelings to you that you don't have.  Sorry, Share, if that is what you meant 
by PR, than accuse yourself of such a thing, as you've done this countless 
times, incorrectly, even as you persist now in what was proven and shown by 
your own self to be completely false in your case. Sorry, I'm not as well read 
as you. To me, it was clear that you had adopted this term for malign purposes, 
imho.  Now, I'm not here to fight with you, but wanted to correct your 
misinterpretation of what I posted back then.  
 

 Hi Em, nice to feel you here.
 

 Ha ha ha.  That is so funny!
 

 Always glad to make you laugh, and you shared my purple color! Only you're 
allowed to do that. I had to get after Steve for using this particular hue once.
 

 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:

 Judy, I don't think that Bill and Brahmi and Lord Knows were trying to get 
revenge on Robin. First of all, I also know Bill in person and he is not that 
kind of person. Plus, none of their posts sounded revengeful to me.
 

 As for the FFL regulars, some were supportive of me but no one encouraged me 
to accuse Robin.
 

 I also want to make the point that Emily posted some definitions of the term 
psychological rape so again, I'm quite sure that no one on FFL thought that I 
coined the term.

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 4:34 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   Oh, yes, right, the old Barry canard: people who express the same views I do 
about something don't think for themselves and just follow my lead in hopes 
that I'll praise them, no matter what I say. That never carried any weight, and 
it hasn't improved with age.
 

 Of course those people who came onto FFL (how many were there, exactly? We 
know about Lord Knows and Bill and Brahmi; any others?) had the motivation to 
take revenge on Robin after what he'd done to them 30 years ago.
 

 I'll let Ann respond to your suppositions about her, but I'd be astonished if 
she would break off a friendship because the friend had negative intentions 
toward Robin. She's a bigger person than that.
 

 And yes, there were people here who were sufficiently at odds with today's 
Robin that they would encourage you to do him dirt by accusing him unfairly 
(including Xeno).
 

  Judy, the people who agreed with you were the ones who usually agree with 
you. Whereas the people from outside FFL who supported me purposefully came 
onto FFL to do so and had zero motivation to do so, other than to validate what 
I had said and thus offer support. I believe Ann remains friends with some of 
those people and I doubt she would do so if they had negative intentions 
towards Robin. As well, there are people on FFL who understood what I meant by 
my accusation and did not find it malign. 
 

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:53 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   I'm sure you're confident, Share. Unfortunately, that doesn't change the 
picture. The people you spoke to knew Robin 30+ years ago, when he was quite a 
different person and did a lot of harm, and they had plenty of motivation to 
encourage you to believe he had mistreated you. We didn't see any such thing 
here, not even remotely; if anything, the reverse was the case. I stand by my 
contention that psychological rape was your malignant fantasy (as several 
others here asserted as well).
 

  Judy, based on my own experience and the validation I received from several 
who experienced Robin in person, I am confident of the validity of what I 
accused Robin of.  

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:14 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, actually. 
I don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I understand it, 
hers was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind 
Share fantasized from Robin).
 

  I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women.  

 On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... 
mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread awoelflebater

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:

 Ann, you can lump me with turq all you want but that will lead to inaccurate 
conclusions as it does here. I haven't thought about any of this in a very long 
time, certainly not about whether you're in Robin's cult and or have an 
attachment to him.
 

 Do I have to do an Emily and remind you in detail how you have referred to 
me as a cult member, a member of Robin's current cult? It may have not been 
this week or last month but you used to do this all the time. I don't care 
Share but you and Barry (lumping now) have asserted many false assumptions and 
opinions about me in relation to Robin. I merely find it silly and ill-informed 
and I only mention it here because you actually thought I would unfriend my 
friends if they hated Robin. 
 

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 7:44 PM, awoelflebater@... 
awoelflebater@... wrote:
 
   

 

---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:

 Judy, the people who agreed with you were the ones who usually agree with you. 
Whereas the people from outside FFL who supported me purposefully came onto FFL 
to do so and had zero motivation to do so, other than to validate what I had 
said and thus offer support. I believe Ann remains friends with some of those 
people and I doubt she would do so if they had negative intentions towards 
Robin. As well, there are people on FFL who understood what I meant by my 
accusation and did not find it malign.
 

 I'll just clarify this one point, Share. It makes absolutely no difference to 
me how my friends feel about Robin, whether they love him or hate him, they are 
still my friends independent of their personal opinions about him. I believe 
that you and and Barry overestimate my attachment to this man. In fact, I know 
you both do since you think I am part of his cult.
 

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:53 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   I'm sure you're confident, Share. Unfortunately, that doesn't change the 
picture. The people you spoke to knew Robin 30+ years ago, when he was quite a 
different person and did a lot of harm, and they had plenty of motivation to 
encourage you to believe he had mistreated you. We didn't see any such thing 
here, not even remotely; if anything, the reverse was the case. I stand by my 
contention that psychological rape was your malignant fantasy (as several 
others here asserted as well).
 

  Judy, based on my own experience and the validation I received from several 
who experienced Robin in person, I am confident of the validity of what I 
accused Robin of.  

 
 
 On Saturday, February 15, 2014 3:14 PM, authfriend@... authfriend@... 
wrote:
 
   OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, actually. 
I don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I understand it, 
hers was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind 
Share fantasized from Robin).
 

  I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women.  

 On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... 
mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
 twisted footsteps.
  not
 surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
 master's foot steps - there are others who have like Bob
 Fickes 
 
 On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stanley@...
 j_alexander_stanley@...
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board
 Ruling
 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Interesting... when you posted earlier this
 
 morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one
 
 thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked
 
 therapist self-description he uses to promote
 himself.
 
 I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the
 
 consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of
 
 honor. Strange guy, that one.
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 
 jchwelch@... wrote:
 
 
 
 Thanks for the
 
 kind words Anne. Of
 
 course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of
 
 the brief outline.IMO (and others who were
 
 involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has
 
 harmed more than one person, including at least three
 
 ex-clients. From Knapp's online public

Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread emilymaenot
 watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women.  

 On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... 
mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
 twisted footsteps.
  not
 surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
 master's foot steps - there are others who have like Bob
 Fickes 
 
 On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stanley@...
 j_alexander_stanley@...
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board
 Ruling
 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Interesting... when you posted earlier this
 
 morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one
 
 thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked
 
 therapist self-description he uses to promote
 himself.
 
 I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the
 
 consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of
 
 honor. Strange guy, that one.
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 
 jchwelch@... wrote:
 
 
 
 Thanks for the
 
 kind words Anne. Of
 
 course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of
 
 the brief outline.IMO (and others who were
 
 involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has
 
 harmed more than one person, including at least three
 
 ex-clients. From Knapp's online public
 
 displays, he has claimed he lost his license over at least
 a
 
 year ago (and that due to a lawsuit), though that isn't
 
 the case because the ruling wasn't made until January,
 
 2014, and there was never a lawsuit. Regardless, Knapp
 seems
 
 to wear a lost license (or as he publicly describes himself
 
 as a defrocked therapist) as a badge of being a
 
 rebel, or something. At least now, there is a public
 
 official ruling which will make it difficult for him to get
 
 licensed again if he ever would have an interest in doing
 
 so.Thanks again. Hope you and the horses are
 
 well. :-) 



 















 















 


 




















Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling

2014-02-15 Thread awoelflebater
@... 
wrote:
 
   OK. I'm not aware of any stories of sexual hanky-panky with Knapp, actually. 
I don't believe that was the problem Carol had with him. As I understand it, 
hers was more a matter of genuine psychological rape (as opposed to the kind 
Share fantasized from Robin).
 

  I read plenty of his stuff and followed his troubles when patients began to 
complain - I watched him blame everyone but himself and he certainly did use 
Marshy's playbook in some respects to get his hands on women.  

 On Sat, 2/15/14, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... authfriend@... 
mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
 
 Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board Ruling
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 7:15 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 You didn't know Knapp. He followed his own
 twisted footsteps.
  not
 surprising that he would eventually follow in his form
 master's foot steps - there are others who have like Bob
 Fickes 
 
 On Sat, 2/15/14, j_alexander_stanley@...
 j_alexander_stanley@...
 wrote:
 
 
 
 Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: John M. Knapp: Licensing Board
 Ruling
 
 To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
 
 Date: Saturday, February 15, 2014, 5:48 PM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Interesting... when you posted earlier this
 
 morning, I Googled around to refresh my memory, and the one
 
 thing that really stood out for me was the defrocked
 
 therapist self-description he uses to promote
 himself.
 
 I thought it very odd that a person would accentuate the
 
 consequences of his malevolence as some kind of badge of
 
 honor. Strange guy, that one.
 
 
 
 
 
 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
 
 jchwelch@... wrote:
 
 
 
 Thanks for the
 
 kind words Anne. Of
 
 course, there is a lot that happened between the lines of
 
 the brief outline.IMO (and others who were
 
 involved), Knapp's revocation is a good thing; he has
 
 harmed more than one person, including at least three
 
 ex-clients. From Knapp's online public
 
 displays, he has claimed he lost his license over at least
 a
 
 year ago (and that due to a lawsuit), though that isn't
 
 the case because the ruling wasn't made until January,
 
 2014, and there was never a lawsuit. Regardless, Knapp
 seems
 
 to wear a lost license (or as he publicly describes himself
 
 as a defrocked therapist) as a badge of being a
 
 rebel, or something. At least now, there is a public
 
 official ruling which will make it difficult for him to get
 
 licensed again if he ever would have an interest in doing
 
 so.Thanks again. Hope you and the horses are
 
 well. :-)