Barry is constitutionally unable to tell the truth. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > Hi Dan (or whoever you are), > > Even skimming FFL in Message View, it was impossible > for me to not notice that its posters are being told > by one of the group's professional cult apologists > that the person who made the recent inflammatory, > profane, and above all stupid posts on August 4th > was not you.
Barry must be referring to me here, but he's completely lost control of himself to call me a "professional cult apologist." He knows neither characaterization is accurate. He also knows anybody here who's familiar with my posts knows he's lying. > The cult apologist claims that your > account had "obviously" been hacked, and that it's > not really you. I made no claims. I made it clear I wasn't certain. And I did not use the word "obviously." So that's three lies in one paragraph. What's happening, for those of you who aren't that familiar with Barry's very predictable behavior, is that I pointed out that he was lying in a different post about Dan. Check it out: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/316260 Every time he's caught lying, his response is to tell more and bigger lies. And he repeats his lies on a regular basis even after they've been exposed. He's told the one in the post I just linked to before as well: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/message/282434 He was corrected by feste at the time. Did he retract and apologize? Of course not. He just filed the lie away to tell again. Actually both times the lie was even worse than was exposed. Let's look at the most recent iteration: > Remember, this is the same guy who started out > at Fairfield Life trying to find out the real > identities of posters he didn't like. At the > time, folks suspected he might have intended > to do them harm. Not only had Dan been participating for two and a half years before he complained about anonymity, he wasn't complaining about "posters he didn't like," as Barry falsely claims. He was complaining about Rick posting emails he'd received from non-FFL members without identifying the source. And nobody "suspected he might have intended to do them harm." Barry made that up. Barry will claim that the poster is too cowardly to respond, even though he's well aware the poster has almost certainly been thrown off for making the obscene posts. Copied from below: > 7. Did you actually have to PAY the professional > cult apologist to claim that it wasn't really > you making these posts, or is that something > that professional cult apologists just DO when > a member of their cult embarrasses it? My guess is that the obscene poster is also a TMer and has been lurking on FFL. So much for Barry's "embarrassment" theory. Dan's last post here was in July 2011. I suspect he had unsubscribed, and the obscene poster posed as Dan and asked to be resubscribed with the intention of venting his uncontrollable rage on Barry and Vaj. If so, the motivation was certainly understandable, even if the implementation was unacceptable. Copied from below: > 4. Once you *had* settled on these two people to > spray with invective, how did you know what their > common derogatory nicknames were on this forum? > I mean, you called vajradhatu108 "Vag," a derog- > atory and insulting permutation of his posting > ID that is commonly used here by people with a > grudge against him. As Barry is aware, emptybill and Nabby are the only posters who commonly use "Vag" (I don't recall anybody else ever using it). (I'm one of Vaj's sharpest critics, and I've *complained* about the use of "Vag.") So let's count what Barry writes above as another lie. > Assuming that this is true, and that you didn't just > suffer from a bout of Posting While Intoxicated > (the conclusion that most non-cult apologists would > come to) That would be a rather stupid conclusion, actually, for anyone to come to who remembers Dan's previous posting habits. It's not impossible that Dan has gone completely starkers, but it's not the most likely reason for the obscene posts. "Posting While Intoxicated" isn't likely either. Those weren't drunk posts, they were crazy posts. The person who made them needs professional help. But then, so does Barry. , I'm curious as to how you, as a hacker, > decided to do what you did. Would you mind answering > a few questions about it? > > 1. How did you, after having somehow hacked into > danfriedman2002's Yahoo account, decide where you > were going to post the rants intended to make him > look bad? How did you happen to settle on Fairfield > Life? > > 2. How did you manage to emulate Real Dan's > consistent bad spelling? > > 3. How did you decide which other posters to > reply to with a stream of invective? I mean, you > could have picked *anyone*, at random. What made > you decide to lash out at (coincidentally) two of > the same people that The Real Dan had lashed out at > in his Real Posts, for the alleged crime of being > "anti-guru?" Was that just coincidence, or did you > plan that in your attempts to make Real Dan look > bad? > > 4. Once you *had* settled on these two people to > spray with invective, how did you know what their > common derogatory nicknames were on this forum? > I mean, you called vajradhatu108 "Vag," a derog- > atory and insulting permutation of his posting > ID that is commonly used here by people with a > grudge against him. Similarly, having picked him > at random for your drive-by, you called turquoiseb > "turq" and "turqy," again almost as if you were > very familiar with how *he* was addressed on this > forum by his detractors. How did you know all this? > > 5. Finally, since I'm pretty sure in this post > that I'm addressing Real Dan, the person who made > all of the posts on August 4th, are you feeling > better and a little more sane now? I hope so. > > 6. What was it (other than being drunk or stoned > or both) that "set you off" and caused you to > embarrass yourself like this? Did your regular > practice of TM cause (as one person suggested) > "some roughness of awareness?" Does this happen > to you often? > > 7. Did you actually have to PAY the professional > cult apologist to claim that it wasn't really > you making these posts, or is that something > that professional cult apologists just DO when > a member of their cult embarrasses it? > > Thanks for taking the time to answer these > questions, and I really hope you come back to > visit us soon, and after having imbibed in > the same substances that inspired you last > time. As I said before, the more often that > long-term TM practitioners such as yourself > *demonstrate* on this forum all that TM has > done for them, and what balanced and happy > individuals they've become as a result, the > more new people will learn TM. > > Jai Guru Fucking Dev, and all that...
