The Emerson Avenger

The Emerson Avenger is a "memory hole" free blog where censorship is scorned. This blog will "guard the right to know" about any injustices and abuses that corrupt Unitarian Universalism. Posters may speak and argue freely, according to conscience, about any injustices and abuses, or indeed hypocrisy, that they may know about so that the Avenger, in the form of justice and redress, may come surely and swiftly. . . "Slowly, slowly the Avenger comes, but comes surely." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

My Photo
Name:
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada

In 1992 I underwent a profound revelatory experience of God which revealed that the total solar eclipse "Eye of God" is a "Sign in the Heavens" that symbolizes God's divine omniscience. You may read about what Rev. Ray Drennan of the Unitarian Church of Montreal contemptuously dismissed as my "psychotic experience" here: http://revelationisnotsealed.homestead.com - This revelatory religious experience inspired me to propose an inter-religious celebration of Creation that would take place whenever a total solar eclipse took place over our planet. You may read about what Rev. Ray Drennan and other leading members of the Unitarian Church of Montreal falsely and maliciously labeled as a "cult" here: http://creationday.homestead.com - I am now an excommunicated Unitarian whose "alternative spiritual practice" includes publicly exposing and denouncing Unitarian*Universalist injustices, abuses, and hypocrisy. The Emerson Avenger blog will serve that purpose for me and hopefully others will share their concerns here. Dee Miller's term DIM Thinking is used frequently and appropriately on this blog. You may read more about what DIM Thinking is here - http://www.takecourage.org/defining.htm

Friday, September 29, 2006

Just Where Did That Unfortunate "Stereotype" of the "Arrogant, Anti-Religious Unitarian" Come From Anyway?

In a sermon titled 'Forgiving God' U*U minister Rev. Victoria Weinstein says -

As we talked for a long time, it turned out that she wasn't the kind of "Left Behind" Bible Belt person I had assumed her to be (you know the "Left Behind" series of books? About the Book of Revelation and the Apocalypse? Well, she had one of those with her). And I wasn't the arrogant, anti-religious Unitarian she had assumed I might be. That happens when you get to talk to people for a long time – that kind of stereotype busting -- and it's a real treat.

16 Comments:

Blogger indrax said...

Perhaps then you should listen to her suggested solution and listen to people.

Do you want my help or not?

What did Drennan say?

Friday, September 29, 2006 8:47:00 am  
Blogger The Emerson Avenger said...

Why do you suppose I posted that particular quote Indrax? Perhaps then U*Us should listen to Rev. Weinstein suggested solution and listen to me. . .

:Do you want my help or not?

For me to want your alleged "help" I would need to be convinced that you actually can be of some real help in this matter. At this point in time, after fairly and reasonably assessing your previous posts, I consider your involvement in this matter to be far from helpful. I have already said that I now consider you to be more adversarial than helpful and doing more harm than good in this matter. Perhaps you did not listen to me. Your most recent posts do nothing to change my mind about that assessment.

:What did Drennan say?

If you bothered to actualy listen to what I say Indrax you would know perfectly well what Rev. Ray Drennan said that I am objecting to. You are the only individual on this planet who has pretended not to know what Rev. Drennan said after having been provided with documents that clearly state the intolerant, demeaning, hostile and abusive words that that Rev. Ray Drennan said to me. It is all over the internet. I repeat, just in case you are still not listening to me, that in the
whole decade long span of this conflict NOBODY, other than you, has ever asked me, "What did Drennan say?" after having being told what Rev. Ray Drennan said or having been provided with letters or other documents that clearly stated what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me. Everybody in the U*U world, and the real world, who is reasonably well informed about this conflict knows very well what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me.

Friday, September 29, 2006 11:15:00 am  
Blogger indrax said...

But you never listen, do you?

For me to want your alleged "help" I would need to be convinced that you actually can be of some real help in this matter.

You appeal to and complain about the UU community, You need to convince people far more skeptical than I. Given your lack of response to many simple questions, you will not convince them.
That is the most profound way I can help you, by preparing you to win.
I think _everyone_ here would agree that your current tactics will most likely leave you on the sidewalk for another 10 years.
If you can't respond effectively to one guy calling you an ass over the internet, then there's no way you're ready to deal with people who you've been making mad for 10 years.

So is that yes, or a no?

doing more harm than good in this matter.

What harm have I done? Asked you to be specific and accurate?

It is all over the internet.

Well, then something you've said is a lie. I don't know what.


in the whole decade long span of this conflict NOBODY, other than you, has ever asked me, "What did Drennan say?"

Has anybody ever tried to help you?
I don't know why others haven't asked, all I know it that I can't find it.

after having being told what Rev. Ray Drennan said or having been provided with letters or other documents that clearly stated what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me.

Who has been told? Where are these letters and documents?

You say lots of people know, but nobody chimes in to point out I'm wrong. This means that either no one here knows, or that everyone who is informed is against you. (not only that, but it would have to mean that everyone who is informed here is so against you that they won't concede a minor point.)

Where is anyone who is 'well informed' about this?

Friday, September 29, 2006 3:00:00 pm  
Blogger The Emerson Avenger said...

:But you never listen, do you?

Not at all Indrax. I am a pretty good listener. It is as a result of listening to you that I have come to the conclusion that the "help" that you offer will probably not be all that helpful. I would be far more justified in saying that U*Us in general, and Montreal U*Us in particular. . . never really listen to what I have to say tom them. Indeed, more often than not, U*Us try to silence me because they really do not want to hear what I have to say.

::For me to want your alleged "help" I would need to be convinced that you actually can be of some real help in this matter.

:You appeal to and complain about the UU community, You need to convince people far more skeptical than I. Given your lack of response to many simple questions, you will not convince them.

Actually I have answered many simple questions many times over. There are virtually no outstanding questions that are genuinely pertinent to resolving this dispute that I have not already answered in the past. If I decide from time to time that I have better things to do with my time than repeat myself that is my prerogative.

:That is the most profound way I can help you, by preparing you to win.

The last time I checked I am prepared to win. . .

:I think _everyone_ here would agree that your current tactics will most likely leave you on the sidewalk for another 10 years.

That's fine by me. It will underline my point about U*Us obstinately refusing to "listen" to legitimate grievances and responsibly act upon them. . . Anyway who says that I won't change my tactics in the near future or at least employ some as yet unused ones, that I have held in reserve?

:If you can't respond effectively to one guy calling you an ass over the internet, then there's no way you're ready to deal with people who you've been making mad for 10 years.

The last time I checked I wasn't getting angry I was getting even. . . The rumors of my "madness" are greatly exaggerated.

:So is that yes, or a no?

What do you think?

::doing more harm than good in this matter.

:What harm have I done? Asked you to be specific and accurate?

I have been very specific and very truthful and accurate. You just have not been listening. . .

::It is all over the internet.

:Well, then something you've said is a lie. I don't know what.

What on Earth are you talking about? You accuse me of telling a lie but can't say what that lie is? I have told no lies and pretty much every accusation I have made against U*Us is backed up by plenty of evidence. Don't accuse me or anyone else of lying if you cannot identify what lie you are talking about.

::in the whole decade long span of this conflict NOBODY, other than you, has ever asked me, "What did Drennan say?"

:Has anybody ever tried to help you? I don't know why others haven't asked, all I know it that I can't find it.

You are changing the subject Indrax. NOBODY and I do mean nobody has ever pretended that they don't know what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me. I have repeatedly stated what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me and how he said it and have provided plenty of context as well.

::after having being told what Rev. Ray Drennan said or having been provided with letters or other documents that clearly stated what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me.

:Who has been told? Where are these letters and documents?

You were sent a computer file that had many of the letters and documents in it months ago. Most of them have been posted on the internet and plenty of them are right here on this blog which you claim to have thoroughly read. The correspondence with Rev. Diane Miller of the UUA's Ministerial Fellowship Committee is available on this blog and elsewhere on the internet. My letter that prompted Rev. Ray Drennan's "sorry excuse for an apology" and the follow-up letter are available on this blog and elsewhere on the internet. The full unexpurgated text of other letters and documents and email communications are available on this blog and elsewhere on the internet.

:You say lots of people know, but nobody chimes in to point out I'm wrong.

In case you haven't noticed very few people other than me bother to chime in about anything you have to say in this matter.

:This means that either no one here knows, or that everyone who is informed is against you. (not only that, but it would have to mean that everyone who is informed here is so against you that they won't concede a minor point.)

I think that your logic is a little flawed here and that there are other possibilities but it may well be that "everyone who is informed here is so against you that they won't concede a minor point.)" Certainly those U*Us who are clearly and unequivocally against me have yet to concede any points. What points have Anonymous U*U conceded Indrax? Maybe that should tell you something. . . If U*Us would start conceding minor points they might progress to proceeding some major points and be well on the way to resolving this conflict in a genuinely just and equitable manner. It is the obstinate refusal of U*Us to concede perfectly valid "points" that I have made over the years that is largely responsible for the fact that this conflict has yet to be justly and equitably resolved.

:Where is anyone who is 'well informed' about this?

That's a good question Indrax. I get the distinct impression that the vast majority of U*Us do not want to be "well informed" about "this" that is why they go to such extreme lengths to try to silence me so that they can persist in the Denial, Ignorance and Minimization of the injustices, abuses and outrageous hypocrisy that I have been exposing and denouncing for over a decade now. . . It is to the eternal shame of the U*U religious community that the obstinate willful ignorance displayed by U*Us, as symbolized by the proverbial ostrich with its head in the sand. . . combined with their shameful shunning and ostracism of yours truly, inspired me to coin the word ostrichization". . .

Friday, September 29, 2006 4:52:00 pm  
Blogger indrax said...

:So is that yes, or a no?

What do you think?


I think you're trying to avoid answering. That is quite rude.
Do you want my help or not?

I need an answer, because at one point you accepted my help.

::doing more harm than good in this matter.

:What harm have I done? Asked you to be specific and accurate?

I have been very specific and very truthful and accurate. You just have not been listening. . .


And you neatly avoid the question, what harm have I done?

::It is all over the internet.

:Well, then something you've said is a lie. I don't know what.

What on Earth are you talking about? You accuse me of telling a lie but can't say what that lie is? I have told no lies and pretty much every accusation I have made against U*Us is backed up by plenty of evidence. Don't accuse me or anyone else of lying if you cannot identify what lie you are talking about.


You said that Drennan said "you mean your psychotic experience.".
You also said that what Drennan said was 'all over the internet'.

One of those is a lie.
Google, at least, cannot find "you mean your psychotic experience" anwhere but on very recent posts of yours. None of the documents you sent me contain the phrase either, nor anything approaching a clear description of the conversation.
The only document I know of which you claim IS specific, is your 20+ page complaint, which you have not posted.

You say you've posted these things repeatedly, but you never link to them.
Put up or shut up, Robin, but don't lie.

And that is how you make a case.

Friday, September 29, 2006 8:04:00 pm  
Blogger The Emerson Avenger said...

:::So is that yes, or a no?

::What do you think?

:I think you're trying to avoid answering. That is quite rude.
Do you want my help or not?

If I clearly tell you that I consider your alleged "help" to not only be quite unhelpful but even harmful and counterproductive do you really think I want that kind of alleged "help"? I already made it clear that your alleged "help" is neither needed nor wanted.

:I need an answer, because at one point you accepted my help.

And at another more recent point I made it clear that your alleged "help" was unhelpful and even harmful.

::I have been very specific and very truthful and accurate. You just have not been listening. . .

:And you neatly avoid the question, what harm have I done?

If you are incapable of fguring that out for yourself that is your problem not mine. . .

::::It is all over the internet.

:::Well, then something you've said is a lie. I don't know what.

::What on Earth are you talking about? You accuse me of telling a lie but can't say what that lie is? I have told no lies and pretty much every accusation I have made against U*Us is backed up by plenty of evidence. Don't accuse me or anyone else of lying if you cannot identify what lie you are talking about.

:You said that Drennan said "you mean your psychotic experience.".
You also said that what Drennan said was 'all over the internet'.

:One of those is a lie.

Neither is a lie. Both are very true. But publicly accusingh me of lying as you have done here is just one example of how your alleged "help" is not only unhelpful but outright harmful to my cause.

:Google, at least, cannot find "you mean your psychotic experience" anwhere but on very recent posts of yours.

The above assertion is very disingenuous and even quite dishonest. You know perfectly well that that by enclosing a phrase like that in quotation marks limits the amount of search engine results that would indicate that Rev. Ray Drennan had intolerantly and abusively, and I have good reason to believe maliciously, labeled my revelatory religious experience as "your psychotic experience".


:None of the documents you sent me contain the phrase either, nor anything approaching a clear description of the conversation.

They clearly state that he labeled my revelatory religious experience as a "psychotic experience" or "your psychotic experience" and you know it. And to think that you accuse me of engaging in "spin". You are being remarkably disingenuous and quite dishonest in pretending that you did not know what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me Indrax. You were provided with plenty of information and were directed to appropriate Google searches or actual web pages that clearly stated what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me. Neither you nor anyone else requires more "context" than I have already provided in terms of what is readily available on the internet.

:The only document I know of which you claim IS specific, is your 20+ page complaint, which you have not posted.

It is only more lengthy and detailed. It is no more "specific". I have been very "specific" about what Rev. Drennan said to me in my other letters of grievance and internet postings that have been available to you for months now.

:You say you've posted these things repeatedly, but you never link to them.

That too is BS I have provided plenty of Google searches that lead to the many internet postings and I have on occasion provided links to "specific" posts. This blog presents copies of the most pertinent documents and you claim to have read it all. Thus your pretense not to know what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me when everyone else in the U*U World and the real world who is even moderately well informed about this conflict knows very well what he said to me to say nothing of what various other U*Us have said to me in the course of this dispute.

:Put up or shut up, Robin, but don't lie.

I am not lieing. If anything I can accuse you of lying about not knowing what Rev. Drennan said to me or otherwise being disingenuous and dishonest as you have been in your most recent post. I have put up and will continue to put up and I will not shut up. . .
And that is how you make a case.

Sunday, October 01, 2006 6:20:00 pm  
Blogger indrax said...

As you wish, my offer is rescinded, I'll get back to you on the rest.

Do I have your permission to publish what you sent me?

Monday, October 02, 2006 12:20:00 am  
Blogger The Emerson Avenger said...

Well you have my permission to publish anything that I have written about this dispute in whole or in part. I obviously can't give you permission to publish the letters from U*U clergy and officials but, since U*Us officially claim that "records are open to scrutiny. . . and ideas are open to criticism-so that people might govern themselves" I would say be my guest. . . I have already published a fair number of these records here and there on the internet in any case.

Monday, October 02, 2006 12:33:00 am  
Blogger indrax said...

publicly accusingh me of lying as you have done here is just one example of how your alleged "help" is not only unhelpful but outright harmful to my cause.

No, Allowing you to persist in a obvious public lie would have been far more harmful. Since you chose to presist in the lie anyway, you will come to understand this.

You know perfectly well that that by enclosing a phrase like that in quotation marks limits the amount of search engine results

Yes, it limits results to pages where those words all apear in that order, together, as one would expect them to if you had fully quoted Drennan anywhere that google searches.

That only a few recent pages show up indicates that what you say Drennan said is not all over the internet. Your search examples seem to only point to you taking snippets of his words and applying your own characterizations.

The sentence "You mean your psychotice experience." would exist in any reasonably complete description of your conversation with Dreannan. I must therefore conclude that no such description exists anywhere google can find it.

They clearly state that he labeled my revelatory religious experience as a "psychotic experience" or "your psychotic experience" and you know it.

Ahh, but "psychotic experience" and "your psychotic experience" are not what Drennan said, they are snippets out of context, at best. "You mean your psychotice experience." and the rest of what you think Drennan said are missing from the internet.

What baffles me is your reluctance to just come out and say what you alledge happened.

What did Drennan say?
What did you say?

Just answer the questions. No snippets.

Tuesday, October 17, 2006 4:14:00 pm  
Blogger The Emerson Avenger said...

::publicly accusing me of lying as you have done here is just one example of how your alleged "help" is not only unhelpful but outright harmful to my cause.

:No, Allowing you to persist in a obvious public lie would have been far more harmful. Since you chose to presist in the lie anyway, you will come to understand this.

You are badly mistaken Indrax. The only person who is clearly and unequivocally guilty of persisting in an "obvious public lie" is you yourself. . . And yes it is harmful to you as an individual person and to the greater U*U religious community that you ostensibly seek to represent or at least defend. It is by no means a lie if I assert that Rev. Ray Drennan contemptuously dismissed my revelatory religious experience as a "psychotic experience" or "your psychotic experience" if he did in fact rudely interrupt me and sneeringly say, "You mean your psychotic experience. . ." when I was trying to explain that revelatory religious experience to him during our fateful meeting in November 1995.

It is absolutely 100% true that Rev. Ray Drennan labeled my revelatory religious experience as a "psychotic experience" or "your psychotic experience". It is by no means a lie. Just a short and sweet version of the truth. Likewise it is true that I have widely reported Rev. Ray Drennan's intolerant and abusive labeling of my revelatory religious experience as "your psychotic experience" on the internet.

I should point out as well that a goodly number of my posts that were made some time ago are no longer on the internet. For example my web site that provided copies of virtually every document arising from this dispute went down in the spring of 2000 when AltaVista got out of the free web site business. Also a lot of my posts to Beliefnet were deleted by Beliefnet "moderators". My posts to various U*U controlled internet forums and blogs are routinely censored and "memory holed" by U*Us who prefer to suppress the truth rather than responsibly deal with it.

::You know perfectly well that that by enclosing a phrase like that in quotation marks limits the amount of search engine results

:Yes, it limits results to pages where those words all apear in that order, together, as one would expect them to if you had fully quoted Drennan anywhere that google searches.

I don't need to "fully quote" Rev. Drennan for you or anyone else to know the essential elements of what he said. There is virtually no difference between my saying Rev. Ray Drennan labeled my revelatory religious experience as a "psychotic experience" or "your psychotic experience" and providing the full quote which is, "You mean your psychotic experience" in direct response to my talking about my revelatory experience. You might as well accuse Readers' Digest of persisting in a public lie for publishing short and sweet versions of previously published works. Are the reporters for the Montreal Mirror engaging in a "public lie" when they report that -

According to Edgar, church minister Rev. Ray Drennan, has refused to investigate his revelation, called him psychotic and dismissed his beliefs as those of a "cult."

or

Edgar, a photographer from Verdun, is protesting his continuing exclusion from the church since an incident when Minister Ray Drennan allegedly questioned his sanity and suggested he was involved in a cult.

I think not. They quite truthfully, albeit somewhat less than accurately. . . reporting the essential facts to the public. They are not engaged in a "public lie" and neither am I when I entirely 100% truthfully and accurately assert that Rev. Ray Drennan labeled my revelatory religious experience as "your psychotic experience" or even "a psychotic experience." In fact I am being more truthful and more accurate than the Montreal Mirror reporters were. . .

:That only a few recent pages show up indicates that what you say Drennan said is not all over the internet. Your search examples seem to only point to you taking snippets of his words and applying your own characterizations.

That is just more of your DIM Thinking U*U BS. I need not repeat what I have already stated which makes it abundantly clear to all but a few morons that what Rev. Ray Drennan said about me is in fact "all over the internet" however I will say that in fact you have knowingly and willfully severely constrained and limited your own "search example" in order to justify and rationalize applying your own false, harmful, and quite possibly malicious. . . characterization of yours truly as being guilty of "persisting" in a "public lie".

Falsely accusing me of engaging in a "public lie" when I am clearly and unequivocally telling the truth is a very "public lie" in itself and you do seem very intent in persisting in that "public lie" Indrax. . . You and other like-minded U*Us would be very well advised to studiously avoid accusing me of lying, publicly or otherwise, unless you are able to provide very credible evidence that I am in fact lying. The fact of the matter is that I can very truthfully and very accurately accuse U*Us of a considerable number of very public lies and back up my accusations with plenty of evidence. I dare say that I can bury the U*U religious community under a mountain of its very public lies. It is not for nothing that one of my picket sign slogans says -

"CHURCH" OF THE LYING LIPS

:The sentence "You mean your psychotice experience." would exist in any reasonably complete description of your conversation with Dreannan. I must therefore conclude that no such description exists anywhere google can find it.

That is just more Denial Ignorance and carefully orchestrated Minimization of the truth aka U*U BS Indrax. For starters you own very carefully limited and constrained Google "search example" turns up four "examples" of the full quote - "You mean your psychotic experience." - including this one dating back to 2003. So please forgive me Indrax for characterizing your assertion that "no such description exists anywhere google can find it" as a "public lie". . . I guess you didn't even bother running the Google search did you Indrax. Certainly it would appear that you failed to search Google Groups. . . Please allow to open your willfully closed U*U mind that is currently engaged in the complete anti-thesis of a free and responsible search for truth and meaning. Allow me to remind you that there was a time when more examples of the full quote were available on the internet but a goodly number were deleted.

::They clearly state that he labeled my revelatory religious experience as a "psychotic experience" or "your psychotic experience" and you know it.

:"Ahh, but "psychotic experience" and "your psychotic experience" are not what Drennan said, they are snippets out of context, at best. "You mean your psychotice experience." and the rest of what you think Drennan said are missing from the internet.

Man are you ever in stunningly delusional deep DIM Thinking Denial Indrax. The terms "psychotic experience" and "your psychotic experience" are in fact the core element of one of the three major intolerant and abusive phrases or sentences that Rev. Ray Drennan said to me and which I formally complained about in my letters of grievance. Those words are not just snippets out of context, at best, as you so ridiculously assert. You are just being stunningly U*U retentive in foolishly accusing me of lying because I state the basic essential facts rather than repeat the full quote which only has two other non-essential words in it in any case. . .

:"You mean your psychotice (sic) experience." and the rest of what you think Drennan said are missing from the internet.

ROTFLMU*UO

No they are not and you know it. BTW I know very well what Rev. ray Drennan said to me, to say nothing of what a good number of other intolerant and abusive U*Us actually said to me. You are engaging in more DIM Thinking Denial, Ignorance and Minimization when you insinuate that I don't know what Rev. Drennan said by saying "what you think Drennan said". . .

:What baffles me is your reluctance to just come out and say what you alledge happened.

What baffles me is your absolutely stunning reluctance to just come out and acknowledge that I have repeatedly stated time and time again what I alledge happened.

:What did Drennan say?

You and hundreds if not thousands of other U*Us know perfectly well what Drennan said Indrax. Wake up and smell the stale Bridgehead coffee. . .

What Drennan said #1

What Drennan said #2

What Drennan said #3

:What did you say?

Now that's another question. . .

When Rev. Drennan dismissed my religious beliefs, as informed by my revelatory religious experience, as being nothing but "silliness" and "fantasy" during our meeting of November 1995 when he tried to leave the meeting without having even dealt with the very reason that I had invited him to my apartment to explain and justify my beliefs by showingb him an exposition of images that illustrated my research into how total solar eclipses had influenced ancient humanity's religious beliefs I simply but firmly reminded him that the whole purpose of having the meeting in my apartment was to be able to show him the said exposition as a "visual aid" as it were that help to validate my beliefs. He reluctantly agreed to stay and proceed to express extreme skepticism about my beliefs as presented in the exposition of images in a sarcastic manner. As I was explaining my beliefs and specifically speaking about my revelatory religious experience he rudely interrupted me by cutting in and sneeringly saying, "You mean your psychotic experience." I might add that he was quite literally in my face when he did this. Rev. Ray Drennan stands several inches taller than me but he stooped down a bit, cocked his head to the left a bit, and with a grimace of anger and contempt said what he said. If I remember correctly I did not immediately challenge that intolerant and abusive outburst but quite calmly continued to try to explain my beliefs to him. I can however refresh my memory by referring to mu initial letter of grievance which provides a lot of detail about what he said and how he said it and how I responded to it but I just do not have it handy at the moment. The next intolerant and offensive, to say nothing of abusive and malicious. . . thing that Rev. Ray Drennan did was to once again rudely interrupt me as I was telling him what Creation Day was all about by saying, "You mean your cult." When he said this I immediately responded by saying, "What do you mean by "cult" Ray?" I asked this question because the word "cult" has several levels of meaning and in and of itself is not necessarily intolerant and offensive. I knew from the contemptuous manner that Ray used the word that he meant it in the worst sense but I wanted to have him to either confirm that or back away from his intolerant and abusive outburst. He responded to my question by saying, "I mean a manipulative and secretive religious group." I don't remember my exact words in response to that but I do believe that I calmly but firmnly expressed my objection to his labeling of Creation Day as "your cult". This did not prevent Rev. Ray Drennan from hurling the four-letter 'C' word back at me twice as he was leaving my apartment. . .

:Just answer the questions. No snippets.

Feeling better now? Be assured that when I have nothing particularly better to do with my time I will get my hands on the text file of my original letter of grievance against Rev. Ray Drennan's intolerant and abusive clergy misconduct of February 14th 1996 and (re)post it to the internet so that you and other U*Us can read it to your heart's content but I do not have the file on this new computer and need to retrieve it from another location. It may be a few more weeks and months before I post it.

Tuesday, October 17, 2006 6:52:00 pm  
Blogger The Emerson Avenger said...

Here's another "search example" for you Indrax. . . Google may be the biggest and best search engine on the internet but it does not index all web sites. A good alternative search engine is the alltheweb.com search engine that often findss sites that are not indexed in Google. I suggest that you run an alltheweb.com search for "You mean your psychotic reaction" as it will find a result that dates back to 2000 and which provided a link to my now non-existent Altavista.com web site that provided copies of pretty much all of the letters and doocuments arising out of this conflict. I dare say that the last line of that post to the CFUU forum, which quotes the famous words of an American Revolutionary war naval commander by the name of John Pauk Jones, is one that U*Us would have done well to pay heed to. . . Here let me make it easy for you.

Thursday, October 19, 2006 3:53:00 am  
Blogger The Emerson Avenger said...

Oops. . . Needless to say I meant to say "You mean your psychotic experience." I guess must have been subconsciously thinking about my "CHURCH OF THE PSYCHOTIC REACTION picket sign slogan. Or perhaps I was thinking about the rather overboard reaction of a certain loose canon of a U*U Naval chaplain that my quite prophetic CFUU post was responding to. . .

Thursday, October 19, 2006 3:58:00 am  
Blogger indrax said...

Let me be clear on this:
The lie I accuse you of is saying that what Drennan said is all over the internet, when in fact it was not.

To put this lie in some context, I have been asking you to state what was said, and to put your snippets into context since at least December of 2005.

I have made it clear several times that anyone deserves to have the best possible transcript of the conversation if you expect them to make any decisions about your case.

That you had once posted a better description of the conversation does not make your statement any more true, or less of a lie. You admit that the document is no longer on the internet, yet you belittled on my own blog for not running a simple search.

That you can dig up a few examples of the full quote from years ago also Does not make your statment any less of a lie. 1) A few isolated examples do not constitute 'all over'. 2)finding those examples is only possible once one knows the full sentence, sifting through all the other 'psychotic experience' posts would have been extremely difficult. 3) Even after finding these examples, they are not transcripts, and provide little new information. They do not contain what Drennan said, but only one slightly longer snippet.

This is made worse by the fact that you decide to accuse me of 'DIM Thinking' for not thinking to run a usenet search (on a phrase I would have had to know to run the search in the first place.)

What's more, I acknowldged that the sentence seemed familiar and I probably had seen it before, but that doesn't give me or anyone else access to the information now.
I should point out as well that a goodly number of my posts that were made some time ago are no longer on the internet.
You should have pointed that out when I started asking, instead of insisting I find now-deleted posts on my own.

You do need to fully quote both him and you for anyone to even know what is essential. While in this case the full sentence only adds two words, there is no way for anyone to know that. There is still no way to know most of the rest of the conversation.

In short, in the past year on this blog you have not provided enough information to make an informed decision, you have mocked me repeatedly for asking questions, and you have lied about the availability of information.

I'll give you one more chance to acknowledge this lie, apologize for it and the related mockery, and start answering some basic questions.

Thursday, October 19, 2006 7:39:00 pm  
Blogger The Emerson Avenger said...

:Let me be clear on this:
:The lie I accuse you of is saying that what Drennan said is all over the internet, when in fact it was not.

Yes it is Indrax and I have already demonstrated that a few times here before but allow me to do it one more time. . .

Rev. Ray Drennan said that my monotheistic religious beliefs, as informed by my revelatory religious experience were nothing but "silliness and fantasy". Please note that there are 15 search results in Google Groups alone and 18 on the main web and that insulting and intolerant crack was the least of my concerns. . .

Rev. Ray Drennan said that my revelatory religious experience was a "psychotic experience". I have already provided the full quote which is not substantially different elsewhere. Please note that there are over 180 Google search results that go to a variety of different internet web pages, forums and blogs etc. that clearly say what Rev. Ray Drennan said about my revelatory religious experience.

Rev. Ray Drennan said that Creation Day is "a cult" of the "manipulative and secretive" variety as in the Solar Temple cult and other such dangerous cults. I have explained this in more detail elsewhere. Please note that there are over 60 appropriate Google search results. Please note also that the two worst things that Rev. Ray Drennan said to me and about my religious beliefs and practices are stated right in my Blogger profile.

"All over the internet" is a figure of speech indicating that there are lots of posts stating what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me. In fact there would be hundreds more if U*Us didn't so systematically "memory hole" my posts or otherwise censor and suppress my posts. Many of my hundreds of Beliefnet posts that stated clearly and repeatedly what Rev. Ray Drennan said were purged by the U*U section memory hole operator J. Carlin. There are posts that are on the internet that are not going to be found by Google because they are in unsearchable UU forums and listserves. I am in no way lying when I use the figure of speech "all over the internet" in terms of what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me. To call me a liar because I use a figure of speech to indiacte that there are many posts in diverse internet forums that state clearly what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me is a lie in itself and you would do well to acknowledge that fact and retract your ridiculous assertion that I am a "liar" for saying that what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me is "all over the internet".

I can and will and already have exposed and denounced no shortage of real lies told by U*U liars so you just make U*Us look petty and idiotic by publicly accusing me of lying.

Oh dear. . . Look what I found when I ran an appropriate Google search.

:To put this lie in some context, I have been asking you to state what was said, and to put your snippets into context since at least December of 2005.

Your mixing apples with oranges. You don't need any more context than you already have. You've got loads of context. Just because I did not send you the mother of all grievance letters does not mean that you don't have more than enough context from other sources.

:I have made it clear several times that anyone deserves to have the best possible transcript of the conversation if you expect them to make any decisions about your case.

Yes but you are wrong Indrax. It is not true that "anyone" *deserves* the best possible transcript of the conversation. Only those people who can actually serve a useful role in resolving this conflict *deserve* that and a lot of them already have it unless they destroyed their copies. I am prepared to provide copies of it to real allies that demonstrate some trustworthiness and
competence and also to enemies who have a legitimate role to play in resolving this conflict. I was prepared to provide it to you earlier on but it was not readily available at the time nor is it now. In the meantime your own words and actions gave me reason to be cautious about you and I finally decided that providing it to you would not only serve no useful purpose but might even complicate matters and cause more harm than good to my cause. I came to the regrettable conclusion that you are making very poor decisions and misunderstanding and even twisting the truth in the considerable material that I have already made available to you. I have a right to decide not to provide any more information to you if I decide that

:That you had once posted a better description of the conversation does not make your statement any more true, or less of a lie.

I never at any time said that the original letter of grievance was "all over the internet". On the contrary I have repeatedly stated that it is no longer available on the internet and the text file is not immediately accessible to me. I have to make a trip to go get it and I decided that it wasn't worth the trip to provide it to you. I have not lied in saying that the gist of what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me, the things that are most intolerant, insulting and abusive all readily available "all over the internet" as it were. Accuse me of exaggerating a bit if you want to but I have in no way lied about the words of Rev. Ray Drennan that I am complaining about being "all over the internet."

:You admit that the document is no longer on the internet, yet you belittled on my own blog for not running a simple search.

I told you long ago that that document and some of the other pertinent documents are not on the internet. That was the only reason why I would have to send you text files as email attachments as I initially did. . . And yes, if you can't be bothered to run the appropriate Google searches that would lead you to the virtual reams of material available to you on the internet, perhaps you deserve a little chastizing. Neither

:That you can dig up a few examples of the full quote from years ago also Does not make your statment any less of a lie.

I already made it clear that there is no virtually no difference from the "full quote" and the "snippets" the only words that are snipped from the snippets are the words "You mean" which preceded "your psychotic experience" and "your cult". They are almost redundant except that they indicate that Rev. Ray Drennan rudely interrupted me and belittled me by telling me what the true "meaning" of my own words was in his intolerant and abusive opinion.

:1) A few isolated examples do not constitute 'all over'.

Nitpck all you want. Be assured that most intelligent people will agree that what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me is *figuratively speaking* "all over the internet". U*Us would be very happy if it there was considerably less of it and that it was restricted to a few unread forums.

2)finding those examples is only possible once one knows the full sentence, sifting through all the other 'psychotic experience' posts would have been extremely difficult.

Excuse me but all those other "psychotic experience" posts told any intelligent person more than enough about what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me. You are the only person on the face of this planet who has pretended that they don't know what Drennan said to me becuase I snipped off the words "You mean" or "You mean your". Those words are all but redundant. It is more than enough for me to very truthfully and very accurately report that Rev. Ray Drennan contemptuously dismissed my revelatory religious experience as "your psychotic experience" or "a psychotic experience". In fact my reports are more accurate than the some of the news reports which suggest I am totally psychotic even though I told the reporters very clearly and carefully exactly what Rev. Ray Drennan said and provided lots of pertinent documents that stated in writing exactly what Drennan said. Are you going to accuse the reporters of "lying" because they didn't print the full quote that they had available to them. I think not but be my guest and see how far you get with that kind of ridiculous accusation with them. They reported the essence of what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me and that is all that *matters* Indrax.

:3) Even after finding these examples, they are not transcripts, and provide little new information.

You don't need any "new information". You and other U*Us have all the information that you need in terms of the intolerant, offensive and abusive things Drennan said to me although I could throw in a few more examples if I wanted to. And it's all somewhat "old information" in any case Indrax in that it is all close to a decade old decade old now.

:They do not contain what Drennan said, but only one slightly longer snippet.

Well "what Drennan said" is only two words longer than the "slightly longer snippet" Indrax and you've known that for some time now. What is the difference between "You mean your cult/psychotic experience" and "your cult/psychotic experience"? Nothing worth talking about really other than the fact that preceding those allegations by saying you mean meant that Rev. Drennan was abusively misrepresenting my own words.

:This is made worse by the fact that you decide to accuse me of 'DIM Thinking' for not thinking to run a usenet search (on a phrase I would have had to know to run the search in the first place.)

If I accused you of DIM Thinking it was because you were engaging in some form of what Dee Miller calls DIM Thinking. Quite frankly right here and right now I am going to accuse you of dim thinking because I have had it up to here with your anal retentive stupidity over what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me.

:What's more, I acknowldged that the sentence seemed familiar and I probably had seen it before, but that doesn't give me or anyone else access to the information now.

Whatever Indrax. . .

::I should point out as well that a goodly number of my posts that were made some time ago are no longer on the internet.

:You should have pointed that out when I started asking, instead of insisting I find now-deleted posts on my own.

I never did that Indrax. I insisted that you use the brain God gave you to read some of those undeleted posts that are *figuratively speaking* "all over the internet.

:You do need to fully quote both him and you for anyone to even know what is essential.

No I don't. What is "essential" is "all over the internet". I have however on plenty of occasions described in more detail what he said to me and what I said to him.

:While in this case the full sentence only adds two words, there is no way for anyone to know that.

Wrong. All anyone has to do is ask me for the full sentence if I don't initially provide it as I very often do when I am actually talking with people rather than posting to the internet.

:There is still no way to know most of the rest of the conversation.

You don't need to know most of the rest of the conversation. I am not complaining about "most of the rest of the conversation". It's all but redundant. Still, I did report it in some detail in that initial letter of grievance but I am not sending it to someone who

:In short, in the past year on this blog you have not provided enough information to make an informed decision,

ROTFLMU*UO

Be assured that plenty of people have read this blog, and some of the linked web pages, and have made a very well informed decision about what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me (to say nothing of thousands of Montrealers. . .) and how U*Us responded to my serious grievances arising from his anti-religious intolerance and bigotry and his verbally and psychologically abusive slanderous attacks.

:you have mocked me repeatedly for asking questions,

Only the really stupid questions that you have repeatedly asked even after I have previously provided acceptable answers to you. This whole post is a rehash of rehash of a rehash and it is absolutely the last time that I am responding to any more stupid questions from you Indrax. There is a saying that goes "Never argue with idiots because they drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. . ." I don't mind verbal mud wrestling with U*Us every now and then but this is the last time I am deigning to come down to your level Indrax. I feel like an idiot for even arguing this idiotic rehash one final time with you.

:and you have lied about the availability of information.

No I have not as this post and previous posts prove.

:I'll give you one more chance to acknowledge this lie,

An then what Indrax?

:apologize for it

I am not apologizing for a non-existent lie Indrax. Period.

:and the related mockery,

I'll give that some consideration. Let me get back to you on that.

:and start answering some basic questions.

They had better be good ones or I will not be answering them Indrax. I don't know why I just don't completely write you off as a lost cause but if you ask some pertinent questions that I believe can help to resolve this conflict I will answer them.

Thursday, October 26, 2006 1:36:00 am  
Blogger indrax said...

You are an unapologetic and persistent liar.

I never denied that your popular snippets were all over the internet, in fact I complained

that their prevalence made it more difficult to find any complete descriptions that might

have existed. Don't muddy the waters.

I am in no way lying when I use the figure of speech "all over the internet"

Yes, you are. The argument here is not whether 10 or 50 copies is 'all over'. If there were

5, I could grant you poetic license.

But there are _none_.

Nowhere that I have seen in the past year shows what Drennan supposedly said

immediately before or after "silliness and fantasy".
You say it's not relevant, but why should I believe you? You are a liar.

Your mixing apples with oranges.
I have made it clear many times that I needed a full account of what Drennan said. You knew

what the question meant.

I did not send you the mother of all grievance letters

I didn't pester you about the letter, I don't even know if the letter actually contains the

information I need. I asked what he really said. You said that that was in the letter.

It is not true that "anyone" *deserves* the best possible transcript of the conversation.

Only those people who can actually serve a useful role in resolving this conflict *deserve*

that


But you condemn the wider UU community, including me, for failing to speak up on your

behalf.

Choose: Either we are important, deserve information, and can be held morally responsible

for the side we choose, or we don't have a role, don't need to know, and it's not our

responsibility.

And yes, if you can't be bothered to run the appropriate Google searches that would lead

you to the virtual reams of material available to you on the internet, perhaps you deserve a

little chastizing.


But the searches you were asking me to run COULD NOT HAVE FOUND the information I was

looking for. They could not even have realistically found the few (two?) examples of "You

mean your psychotic experience." and those documents don't provide any more new info of what

Drennan said.
You are a liar.

the words "You mean" which preceded "your psychotic experience" and "your cult". They are

almost redundant except that they indicate that Rev. Ray Drennan rudely interrupted me and

belittled me by telling me what the true "meaning" of my own words was in his intolerant and

abusive opinion.


While interrupting is usually rude, it is not always uncalled for. Since you bring it up,

the words "You mean..." Do bring up the question of what you had been saying previously that

might have caused him to interrupt, rudely or not.
Since you won't tell us, we don't know.

1)what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me is *figuratively speaking* "all over the

internet".


No, slightly larger quotes were available in two(?) places, which could only really be found

after knowing the phrase.

Are you going to accuse the reporters of "lying" because they didn't print the full

quote that they had available to them.


Only if they later misrepresented the availability of what he actually said by saying that

it was already in the paper. I presume they are not liars like you.

You don't need any "new information".
That is not for you to decide.

If I accused you of DIM Thinking it was because you were engaging in some form of what

Dee Miller calls DIM Thinking.


No, you said:
That is just more Denial Ignorance and
carefully orchestrated Minimization of the truth aka U*U BS Indrax. For
starters you own very carefully limited and constrained Google "search
example" turns up four "examples" of the full quote - "You mean your
psychotic experience." - including

href="http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%22You+mean+your+psychotic+experience%22&start=0

&ie=UTF-8&filter=0" rel="nofollow">this one

dating back to 2003.So please forgive me Indrax for characterizing your assertion that "no

such description exists anywhere google can find it" as a "public lie". . . I guess you

didn't even bother running the Google search did you Indrax.


Does Dee Miller think it is DIM thinking to forget about Google Groups?


::I should point out as well that a goodly number of my posts that were made some time ago

are no longer on the internet.

:You should have pointed that out when I started asking, instead of insisting I find

now-deleted posts on my own.


You know what, I should not have written that. I'm sorry.

You see, back in January, we had this exchange.
:I'd also like, to the best of your recollection, a transcription of the conversation

where Drennan said 'your cult' and 'your psychotic experience' and such.

My original letter of grievance of February 14th, 1996 was over 20 pages long and provided a

very detailed history of my interactions with Rev. Ray Drennan that provided plenty of

context in order to show the clear pattern of his "inappropriate" intolerant, suspicious,

malicious and outright hostile and abusive "disruptive and aggressive behaviours". . .

:establishing context is very important.

I whole-heartedly agree. That is precisely why my initial letter of grievance about Rev. Ray

Drennan's highly "inappropriate" "disruptive and aggressive behaviour" towards yours truly

provided well over 20 pages worth of damning context. . .


So you did mention your letter of grievance, Damning 'text indeed.

What is "essential" is "all over the internet".

I'm just asking for the ability to decide for myself what is essential.

All anyone has to do is ask me for the full sentence if I don't initially provide it as I

very often do when I am actually talking with people rather than posting to the

internet.


I've been asking you for full sentences.

Be assured that plenty of people have read this blog, and some of the linked web pages,

and have made a very well informed decision about what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me


Find ONE.

An then what Indrax?

You'll see. Zonk Aonk!

I'll give that some consideration.

Why? If the questions were idiotic, wasn't the mockery justified?

Let me get back to you on that.

I've heard that before.

Friday, October 27, 2006 3:59:00 pm  
Blogger The Emerson Avenger said...

:You are an unapologetic and persistent liar.

No I am not indrax but you are clearly an unapologetic and persistent DIM Thinking idiot.

:I never denied that your popular snippets were all over the internet, in fact I complained that their prevalence made it more difficult to find any complete descriptions that might have existed. Don't muddy the waters.

I'm not muddying the waters at all indrax. You are muddying the waters by repeatedly pretending that you don't know what Rev. Drennan said to me when what he said to me is in fact "all over the internet."

::I am in no way lying when I use the figure of speech "all over the internet"

:Yes, you are. The argument here is not whether 10 or 50 copies is 'all over'. If there were 5, I could grant you poetic license. But there are _none_.

Wrong there are dozens and even possibly hundreds of "copies" of what Drennan said to me all over the internet. I never claimed that the "full sentences" were "all over the internet" only that the most pertinent and essential words and phrases were "all over the internet" as is quite obviously true. . .

:Nowhere that I have seen in the past year shows what Drennan supposedly said immediately before or after "silliness and fantasy".

Then I guess you haven't been looking too hard indrax. In any case all that really *matters* is that he did in fact contemptuously dismiss my religious beliefs, as informed by my alleged "psychotic experience", were nothing but "silliness and fantasy".

:You say it's not relevant, but why should I believe you? You are a liar.

You are an idiot indrax. Only an idiot would call me a lair on the incredibly contrived and flimsy basis that you have now repeatedly done so. . . This is just more ridiculous DIM Thinking on your part.

:I didn't pester you about the letter, I don't even know if the letter actually contains the information I need. I asked what he really said. You said that that was in the letter.

Wrong indrax. I told you that what Rev. Ray Drennan really said is already "all over the internet". Anyway you did pester about the letter.

:But you condemn the wider UU community, including me, for failing to speak up on your behalf.

Because you don't indrax.

:Choose: Either we are important, deserve information, and can be held morally responsible for the side we choose, or we don't have a role, don't need to know, and it's not our responsibility.

You have all the information that you deserve already. You have done a botch-up job of reading and responsibly interpreting the abundant information that has been available to U*Us for years. I am hardly going to go out of my way to send you to misunderstand, misinterpret, or even deliberately misrepresent in an effort to discredit me via misinformation and disinformation as you are already doing now indrax. . .

:But the searches you were asking me to run COULD NOT HAVE FOUND the information I was looking for.

Wrong indrax. They all led to "reams" of examples of what Drennan said to me. You may have wanted "full sentences" but I repeatedly made it clear that the essential information was "all over the internet".

:They could not even have realistically found the few (two?) examples of "You mean your psychotic experience." and those documents don't provide any more new info of what Drennan said.

Exactly indrax. That is why I repeatedly told you that the information that was already available to you was more than enough to go on.

:You are a liar.

No indrax. I have not lied to you about anything. I never stated that the "full sentences" were "all over the internet". I said that what Drennan said to me was "all over the internet" and it most certainly is. . .

:While interrupting is usually rude, it is not always uncalled for. Since you bring it up, the words "You mean..." Do bring up the question of what you had been saying previously that might have caused him to interrupt, rudely or not.

That information is available in many if not most of the posts that are all over the internet. If you had actually entered into a genuinely free and *responsible* search for the truth and meaning of what Rev. Drennan did in fact say t me you would already know what I was saying when he rudely interrupted me.

:Since you won't tell us, we don't know.

Wrong indrax. I have already stated many times over what I was saying when Rev. Ray Drennan rudely interrupted me. It is "all over the internet". . .

::1)what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me is *figuratively speaking* "all over the internet".

:No, slightly larger quotes were available in two(?) places, which could only really be found after knowing the phrase.

Wrong indrax. You don't need the "slightly larger quotes" to know what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me. That is what I have been telling you all along. The slightly larger quotes are the "full sentences' and , as you have already admitted, they provide no new information.

::Are you going to accuse the reporters of "lying" because they didn't print the full quote that they had available to them.

:Only if they later misrepresented the availability of what he actually said by saying that it was already in the paper. I presume they are not liars like you.

I never made any such a misrepresentation myself indrax which is precisely why I am telling you that I am not a liar as you so foolishly accuse me of. It is patently obvious from the Google searches that accompany my responses to you that I was always referring to the essence of what Rev. Ray Drennan said not to the "full sentences". My point was that the "full sentences" provided no meaningful additional information. You and other DIM Thinking U*Us know perfectly well what Rev. Ray Drennan really said to me. This 1998 news report about my protest tells you and other U*Us plenty about what Rev. Ray Drennan *really* said to me indrax.

::You don't need any "new information".
:That is not for you to decide.

Yes it is indrax. Certainly it is up to me to decide how much "new information" that I am going to knowingly and willfully provide to you. You may believe that you need more information but AFAIAC you have more than enough information already available to you to make a very well informed decision about what Drennan said to me and how U*Us badly mishandled my very serious grievances that arose from what Drennan *really* said to me.

::If I accused you of DIM Thinking it was because you were engaging in some form of what Dee Miller calls DIM Thinking.

::No, you said: That is just more Denial Ignorance and
carefully orchestrated Minimization of the truth aka U*U BS Indrax. For
starters you own very carefully limited and constrained Google "search example" turns up four "examples" of the full quote - "You mean your psychotic experience." - including this one dating back to 2003. So please forgive me Indrax for characterizing your assertion that "no such description exists anywhere google can find it" as a "public lie". . . I guess you didn't even bother running the Google search did you Indrax.

:Does Dee Miller think it is DIM thinking to forget about Google Groups?

First off my accusation that you were engaging in DIM Thinking was based on more than just that indrax. I did say "just for starters" didn't I? I am very confident that Dee Miller would agree that a great deal of your behaviour here fits the definition of DIM Thinking. In any case how do i know that you really forgot Google Groups indrax? Maybe you deliberately Ignored it in order to support your DIM Thinking allegations that I am a liar. . .

:::I should point out as well that a goodly number of my posts that were made some time ago are no longer on the internet.

::You should have pointed that out when I started asking, instead of insisting I find now-deleted posts on my own.

:You know what, I should not have written that. I'm sorry.

You know what indrax? There's a whole lot more stupid things that you have written here that you should be a lot more sorry about having written. . .

::You see, back in January, we had this exchange.
:I'd also like, to the best of your recollection, a transcription of the conversation where Drennan said 'your cult' and 'your psychotic experience' and such.

Right. . .

:My original letter of grievance of February 14th, 1996 was over 20 pages long and provided a very detailed history of my interactions with Rev. Ray Drennan that provided plenty of context in order to show the clear pattern of his "inappropriate" intolerant, suspicious, malicious and outright hostile and abusive "disruptive and aggressive behaviours". . .

:establishing context is very important.

I whole-heartedly agree. That is precisely why my initial letter of grievance about Rev. Ray Drennan's highly "inappropriate" "disruptive and aggressive behaviour" towards yours truly provided well over 20 pages worth of damning context. . .

:So you did mention your letter of grievance, Damning 'text indeed.

I already told you many times about that original letter of grievance and had initially planned to send it to you but was very busy with other priorities and then decided that since you couldn't even deal responsibly with the abundant information that was "all over the internet" that there was no point sending you more information to badly misinterpret and/or grossly misrepresent. . .

::What is "essential" is "all over the internet".

:I'm just asking for the ability to decide for myself what is essential.

Well you blew that opportunity by failing to deal responsibly with the abundant information that was available to you indrax. In any case the "essential" portions of what Drennan said are "all over the internet" and provide more than enough information for a person of intelligence and conscience to make a very well informed decision about this matter. Many have already done so. . .

::All anyone has to do is ask me for the full sentence if I don't initially provide it as I very often do when I am actually talking with people rather than posting to the internet.

:I've been asking you for full sentences.

Actually it is only quiet recently that you have asked for "full sentences" indrax and I did provide the few "full sentences" that I can quote within a reasonable time frame afterwards but I also repeatedly made it clear that the "full sentences" were little different than the pertinent "snippets" that are "all over the internet". Previously you had asked for more "context" and I had stated that there was plenty of context in many of the posts that are "all over the internet".

::Be assured that plenty of people have read this blog, and some of the linked web pages, and have made a very well informed decision about what Rev. Ray Drennan said to me

:Find ONE.

I already know of a goodly number indrax. I am confident that there are hundreds and even possibly some thousands of people who know very well that Rev. Ray Drennan contemptuously dismissed my monotheistic religious beliefs as "silleness and fantasy", abusively "diagnosed" my revelatory religious experience as "your psychotic experience" and falsely and maliciously labeled Creation Day as "your cult". That is all most people need to know about what Rev. Ray Drennan said to make an informed decision as to whether or not my accusations against him are valid or not.

::An then what Indrax?

:You'll see. Zonk Aonk!

I would expect that kind of response from an 11 year old indrax and a particularly immature one at that. . .

::I'll give that some consideration.

:Why? If the questions were idiotic, wasn't the mockery justified?

Indeed they were and indeed it was indrax. . .

::Let me get back to you on that.

:I've heard that before.

Indeed you have indrax. . .

Friday, November 24, 2006 4:46:00 pm  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home