The Emerson Avenger Concurs With Malcom X On Brotherhood. . .
"I believe in the brotherhood of all men,
but I don't believe in wasting brotherhood
on anyone who doesn't want to practice it
with me. . .
Brotherhood is a two-way street."
Malcom X
(Al - Hajj Malik El - Shabazz)
(1925-1965)
Comments
Why won't you confess to your lies, and your deceptively taking words out of context? Why did you lie?
Why did you take my words out of context Robin?
Why do you practice bortherhood so poorly with people trying to help you? Why do you reject brotherhood outright over petty disagrements?
Why didn't you answer my questions about your post mentioning the caretaker job? When did the job open? Who got it? Why not you?
Are you going to answer my questions, or are you going to evade them?
:So why are you trying to bully your way into a church that has obviously found your brotherhood lacking?
The last time I checked the Board and congregation of the Unitarian "Church" of Montreal unjustly, unequitably and uncompassionately bullied me out of their alleged "church" for peacefully protesting against the fact that it's fundamentalist atheist bigot of a minister Rev. Ray Drennan, it's fundamentalist athiest bigot of a Board President Frank Greene, and other "like-minded" intolerant and abusive U*Us, had bullied me by labeling me "psychotic", "crazy", a "nutcase" etc. etc. ad nauseum and falsely and maliciously labeling Creation Day as a "cult" and even going so for as snidely insinuating a possible link between Creation Day and that notorious Solar Temple suicide cult.
As Malcom X says, brotherhood is a two-way street. . . It is abundantly obvious that Rev. Ray Drennan, Frank Greene, John Inder and no shortage of other U*Us, including pretty much the whole congregation of the Unitarian Church of Montreal have not only abjectly failed to practice anything even remotely resembling genuine brotherhood with me but have even obstinately refused to practice brotherhood with me for over a decade now.
:Why won't you confess to your lies,
What "lies" indrax? You are the only person accusing me of "lies" and I have already shown that what you characterize as "lies" is open to considerable question and even if there were one or two things I said that could be justifiably characterized as "lies" they are such minor and inconsequential "lies" as to pale in comparison to the outrageous harmful and damaging lies told by U*Us. When are U*Us going to confess to their outrageous lies indrax including, but by no means limited to the slanderous and damaging lies that I am "psychotic" "crazy" or otherwise "mentally unstable", that Creation Day is a "cult", that I was involved in some kind of "chair throwing incident" etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum?
:and your deceptively taking words out of context?
I did not *deceptively* take words out of context indrax. I have already argued that matter repreatedly and will not waste any further time on it now. I will say however that I can just as easily accuse you of deceptively taking words out of context in terms of your original idiotic question "What was said?" of December 16th last year. You took the "snippets" out of their abundant context in numerous internet posts yourself and then had the utter gall to pretend that they lacked context. That was and still is *deceptive* indrax because plenty of context was provided in the various internet posts that you took the snippets from. You also deceptively took words out of context in the last day or so in terms of your comment regarding the post about me by Beantown Bwana. N'est-ce pas indrax?
:Why did you lie?
I am very confident that most people who would take the time to responsibly examine your accusations that I am lying would agree that did not in fact "lie" about anything indrax. I expect however that few people will bother to do so since your status as a DIM Thinking U*U troll with absolutely minimal credibility is now very well established here to say nothing of elsewhere on the internet. . .
This ain't no party, this ain't no disco, this ain't no fooling around indrax. . .
:Why did you take my words out of context Robin?
Why did you take my words out of context over a year ago and then pretend that they lacked context indrax? Why did you take Beantown Bwana's words out of context in your recent DIM Thinking attempt to pretend that his recent post about me was not supportive?
:Why do you practice bortherhood so poorly with people trying to help you?
Sorry indrax but anyone who bothers to examine our relationship will see that your own self-proclaimed "friendship" aka "brotherhood" was open to considerable question months ago if not over a year ago.
:Why do you reject brotherhood outright over petty disagrements?
I could be mistaken indrax but I believe that you have it ass-backwards aka U*U-backwards. I do believe that it was you who officially withdrew your alleged friendship a while back over what are indeed "petty disagreements" as I have been saying all along. . .
:Why didn't you answer my questions about your post mentioning the caretaker job?
I already told you why indrax so you are either being quite diningenuous in asking that question or you have a terrible memory. Those questions are of minimal relevance to my much more serious complaints about U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy and that issue has been dealt with elsewhere on the internet already.
:When did the job open? Who got it? Why not you?
Irrelevant to my main concerns indrax. I already told you that I would not waste time answering this questions that serve only to distract attention away from the main issues.
:Are you going to answer my questions, or are you going to evade them?
I have aready told you that I am in no way obliged to answer questions that I consider to be stupid, irrelevant, or distractions from the main issues at hand idrax. In fact I have some reason to believe that you may be knowingly and willfully attempting to divert attention away from the much more serious main issues of concern by repeatedly asking such distracting questions.
And you complain about my questions.
You said you answered my question you did not. If you did, link it. You are a liar.
You said you were not evasive. I spent months trying to get you to give me basic information. You are a liar.
they are such minor and inconsequential "lies"
No, they are not. You cannot lie about how you have treated a person, insult them, and pretend that the lies are inconsequential.
I did not *deceptively* take words out of context indrax.
Yes you did, this is a lie.
I have already argued that matter repreatedly and will not waste any further time on it now.
No, you ignore it every time I bring it up. I asked for full sentences, and you pick my words apart to make it look like I didn't.
You took the "snippets" out of their abundant context in numerous internet posts yourself
Acutally, I believe I took those snippets out of only the one letter, which had little to no context.
But I think it's great that you suposedly answered the question even though it was so stupid and DIM thinking. Could you link to your answer? No? Liar.
Why did you take Beantown Bwana's words out of context in your recent DIM Thinking attempt to pretend that his recent post about me was not supportive?
I said that he was not standing up for you. As I said, he seems abivalent at best. I maintained the in-context meaning of everything I quoted. He said some positive things about you and some negative things about you. He said some things about you that have caused you to label other people as DIM thinking.
He gave no indication that he would do anything to stand up for you in any way. He said he wouldn't revisit the issue on his blog, and he said he wasn't going to talk about it with other UU's at this time.
Where is the standing up? He posted about you and posted that he's not doing anything for you.
I think you need to ask some of you 'supporters' to actually do something. I expect when you show your true colors you will lose much of their empathy.
I do believe that it was you who officially withdrew your alleged friendship a while back over what are indeed "petty disagreements" as I have been saying all along. . .
Not quite. I asked you if you wanted my help, and you didn't. You made it clear that you had no interest in brotherhood, fellowship, or anything else. This is not an uncommon pattern with you. I recall urging you to try to win over anonymousUU, and you said something to the effect of you didn't need to win over UU's like him. When people disagree with you, you dismiss them. (Though I'll grant you that he didn't want anything to do with you either.)
Those questions are of minimal relevance to my much more serious complaints about U*U injustices, abuses and hypocrisy and that issue has been dealt with elsewhere on the internet already.
That's funny, because you 'already told me' that it was irrelevant to the thread, which is clearly incorrect, since you mentioned it in the parent post for the first time ever one this blog.
May I assume that that was a mistake?
Why did you take my words out of context over a year ago and then pretend that they lacked context indrax?
You evaded my question Robin.
Why did you take my words out of context Robin?
I'm not sure I had any of the context a year ago. I know at the time I was trying to encourage you to prenet your case simply and cleary in a single authoritative location, which you still haven't done.
Irrelevant to my main concerns indrax. I already told you that I would not waste time answering this questions that serve only to distract attention away from the main issues.
WHY ARE YOU COVERING UP THESE UU INJUSTICES?!?
Seriously, you cover lots of things that diverge from your main complaints all time. Why are you unwilling to answer these questions?
And for the record, they are entirely relevant to your complaints against the UCM, as it goes to motive.
I have aready told you that I am in no way obliged to answer questions that I consider to be stupid, irrelevant, or distractions from the main issues at hand idrax.
Is that why you didn't answer my question of December 16, 2005?
In fact I have some reason to believe that you may be knowingly and willfully attempting to divert attention away from the much more serious main issues of concern by repeatedly asking such distracting questions.
That's funny, because this is all about the fact that you wouldn't answer my simple questions that pretained directly to the core of your complaints. You might want to say that you have more serious complaints against the UCM and the UUA in general, but remember that you are right now refusing to answer very simple questions about Frank Greene, and your claimed discrimination.
I am not trying to cover up anything Robin. I am asking questions that you won't answer, and that's been the problem since the beginning. As I said, this would have been a lot easier if you'd answered the question a year ago.
Something like this would have been nice:
"You mean your psychotic experience."
"You mean your cult."
I don't remember the exact sentence for the other two.
But you evaded that question.
And yes, I probably would have pressed you for more context than that, but at least you would have answered, and been open. We might have ben able to go forward from there.
But instead you gave me no response. You link now to a post I made in February, Do you think maybe I was pressing for answers to the questions you chose to ignore since December? How do you think it felt to offer someone help, for him to promise to answer your questions, and then to be ignored.
And then you have the audacity to lie and say that you answered, and that you were not evasive. No Robin, my memory is better than that.
Stop running away Robin.
At least stand up for yourself.
'Cause you responded to several other posts last night, and left this one. And you have a pattern of letting threads die, so you can ignore the points I make without ever really adressing them.
So yeah, I figured you had decided to leave this one.
Why did you take my words out of context Robin?
I would love for you to highlight this pattern of letting threads die.
When and where did you answer my question of a year ago?
You know I decided to look back myself on past thread from November and December.
I looked at posts where we discussed your lying, and I looked to see which of us had the most recent substantial comment.
Out of 8 threads, you left me hanging on 7. In two months.
No wonder I have to repeat myself.
If you think my criteria are sketchy, do the numbers yourself.
As an added bonus of digging through the archive, I found this:
:Then why didn't you answer my questions of December 16, 2005. specifically asking for full sentence quotes.
Because you already had more than enough information available to you indrax and that is what I have being telling you all along.
From here on in if you post off topic I will ignore those posts.
I think that is quite illustrative.
Are you sure you weren't evasive? Are you sure you answered my question a year ago? are you sure you don't have a pattern of letting threads die?
In one post you say you answered, in another you explain why you didn't.
But you never just link to the answer.
I'll tell you what Robin, I'll save you the trouble of creating a special thread for me. I'll make a stand right here.
Happy Solstice!
Take a stand.
Or better: Listen to your Father.
Wrong indrax. I am not running away as you allege. Most intellignent people will agree that I have already provided far more attention that you deserve. I am just setting reasonable priorities and the new posts about my newly started protest outside of the offices of the Quebec Human Rights Commission take priority over further useless arguing with an idiot.
:Make a stand.
The last time I checked I have been making a stand for over a decade now and most recently I am making a very significant, very public and hopefully very productive stand right in front of the offices of the Quebec Human Rights Commission. N'est-ce pas indrax?
:Or better: Listen to your Father.
There goes the DIM Thinking indrax troll pathetically grasping at straws again. . .
Just what do you want me to listen to indrax?
Please remind me and everyone else reading this thread.
Then tell me why you believe that I should listen to whatever it was that my father said.
Allow me to graciously forewarn you that no matter how you answer to these questions you will be setting yourself up for yet another fall, and a fairly significant one at that.
BTW I can't help but notice that you capitalized the word 'father'. Is that some kind of Freudian slip indrax? Care to explain why you capitalized 'father'?
If I'm not mistaken, your father said you should 'stop kicking people in the balls'.
:You still haven't answered the question in bold at the top of the thread. You are still running from it.
Not at all indrax. I just have much better things to do with my time right now than answer that particular question that is about a comparatively trivial matter. I will eventually get around to answering it on this special thread that I was compelled to create just for oh so special you as a result of your incessant trolling and SPAMMING of The Emerson Avenger blog. Any future comments or questions from you must be posted to that special 'Arguing With indrax' thread. Comments and questions that you make elsewhere on this blog will not be responded to period. If you want *any* response from me at all you will have to post your comment or question in the 'Arguing With indrax' thread. It will be up to you to identify which thread your comment or question refers to, feel free to provide as much context as you want to by copying and pasting pertinent parts of those threads that you are responding to.
You've promised many times you would answer my questions, only to let the thread die.
You've said you wouldn't respond to me anymore before, too.
Frankly, I think you lack the mental discipline.
I however, will continue to make a stand here.
Perhaps you should consult my timeline.
At least you've well established that you still think you have the right to out bloggers because they criticize you.
If I hold my breath longer, will you link to the answer?
Indeed you did but I guess that was something of a lie since you then proceeded to SPAM several of my other posts. As a result of your incessant SPAM and your refusal to associate your real name with your DIM Thinking SPAM posts you are disallowed from posting here for one month. If you violate that quite lenient temporary suspension of your posting privileges you will have the suspension extended by one week for each post that violates the suspension.
:At least you've well established that you still think you have the right to out bloggers because they criticize you.
I and other people have the right to "out" anonymous bloggers for any number of reasons indrax. The only blogger that I have actually "outed" so far is Rev. Victoria Weinstein who insulted and defamed me, and a variety of other people, on her pseudonymous Peacebang blog. The fact of the matter however is that it was Peacebang's outrageous hypocrisy in stridently criticizing Catholics about sexual abuse at a time when one of her own parishioners was convicted of raping his preteen neighbor's daughter and a preteen "female family member"who apparently was not his daughter that caused me to decide to out Peacebang as Rev. Victoria Weinstein. I could have justifiably "outed" Peacebang as
Rev. Victoria Weinstein over a year ago if it was only because of insulting and defaming me alone. . .
:If I hold my breath longer, will you link to the answer?
Nope. I do not feel obliged to feed trolls indrax and will not waste my time linking to things for you, especially since you will not be posting here for a month or so effective immediately.
If you're not hiding, Where are you?
There are standing questions that you've had months to answer.