|
... or you may call this the long goodbye. But I will set the record straight before I leave - and I refuse to stay where the pursuit of important truths are buried by a deluge of dramatic acts worthy of wounded souls and the Edge of Night - that is, if the good folks of United People will allow me the dignity to set the record straight before the lynch mob finds the tall oak tree.
I stayed quiet for much of yesterday ... basically to gauge whatever end results misinformation, distorted information, disinformation - and flat out lies hitched to infallible egos and diminished purpose - would deliver.
No particular order, but let's tackle them as they come to my mind. As oft the case, I speak extemporaneously, without rehearsal, and sometimes - apparently - with too much color. That's a habit I picked up being a satirist of sorts. But satire is a drink for refined tastes and minds ... not for automatons with haste and an axe to grind.
Gypsy Woman <-------------- I make no apologies for any remark I've made in her direction. Just one quick visit to her blog - and even good infallible, logical, benevolent Chico admits to cringing upon reading her blog - reveals that I've handled her with feathers and had forgotten to bring the tar along.
Forget that she initiated a barrage of innuendo and ad hominem last year for my referring her to as "What a mother ... what a woman!" ... or called me a coward, a Nexus henchman, a minion, etc ... you see, I was part of Avalon and Nexus, and that - in her twisted mind - was a capital offense. She even made a Rocky mountain of a molehill about her name being released into the public domain ( a curious thing that because very few of us have real anonymity on the web). Drama queen, anyone? Forget the willful deception she carried out with Steve Allen (on members of her own blog, no less). Forget her close personal acquaintanceships with two of the more suspicious characters in alternative media: Bill Ryan and Charles of Atticus1 ... before she turned on both of them like a bat out of Helsinki, e.g. after things went sour in those two relationships. Forget that she once wrote on her blog that she was interested in some kind of Hollywood scripting contract - so we know where her priorities lie, e.g. truthseeking is a facade for GW as she seeks personal opportunities. Forget the strange circumstance of a B.C. single mother with barely enough funds to keep the bills from biting ... involved with a trial a continent away (South America), and with evidence-gathering on yet another continent (Europe) ... she may well be speaking the truth in the Woodward Report - but where did she get the funds to pursue the evidence?? Is it really so bizarre to hypothesize about the real possibility of the letters G and W dancing with each other in an alphabet soup bowl? Forget that she has recently sanitized her attacks against me by merely calling me an Intellectual Man - personal enlightenment on her part ... or the rewriting of the historical record to paint over how disrespectful she has been towards me in the past year? Curious - the further - given that her recent softer paints of my character have coincided with my calling her out as a screech owl, a tipsy gypsy, a drama queen ... and remarking that her boobs will be remembered long after her brains have been forgotten. Of course, Andy who is proficient at denuding text and distorting narrative ... would have you believe that that was a sexist remark? But was it? Here's a salient fact for those interested in truthseeking and not what Andy is presenting: GW herself posted a photo of herself in a Playboy Bunny suit - from her waitressing days - when she first started her blog. To wit, she was selling her boobs long before I was buying them. Who is the real sexist then, good folks ... the seller of her sex ... or the satirist?
But forget all that about GW, good folks. The following is the more important point. That vile vituperative vixen with a viper's tongue ... and a volatile disposition that would've made Beelzebub himself recoil and possibly repent ... made slanderous, salacious, personal attacks against a few friends of mine (most notably Richard and Celine). Ask yourself this: do you really think I would've been a good friend to them if I had just walked away leaving the Queen of Spades free to dig her sharp poison pen into the back of the Queen of Hearts?
I'm going to have some breakfast now ... but chew on this question before I come back to continue the long goodbye (if I'm still allowed to do so, e.g. before the haste to ban this genuine truthseeker by those who are using truthseeking as a facade to attack and disrupt alternative forums, seals and delivers): Chico told me that he spent two hours directly talking with GW to get her side of things. So why does Chico feel so compelled to extend benefit of doubt to every snake that slithers in the grass? I mean, I can understand if it happens a few times - you know, human curiosity or error - but this is happening with all too much regularity with Chico. GW, Brockbrader, Cassidy, Assange, Pilger, Fisk, etc. I mean, should we all chip in and buy him a new BS detector? A new moral compass? For he appears to have damaged or lost both of his.
ps: FWIW, virtually all the quotes of my having used ad hominems (that Andy graciously referenced in another post) were reactive in nature. I have a temper with the best of them, let it be known ... but 99% of the time it is reactive in nature. You rarely see proactive tamper on my part because - unlike Andy or GW or Mags or DSimon ... or even our own lofty administrator on the autobahn to autocracy - I've outgrown the age of provocation. That being said, I'll react to most anything (and at my own leisure). And I assure you, I'm quite human in my reactions and am proud of the fact. You'll never make a politically-corrected robot out of me. So when you read Andy's post of references, know that he forgot to include the provoking remarks that preceded by rejoinders. Denuding text; distorting context ... that sorta thing.
ps2: One other thing, that nasty PM Andy sent me - which is proof of his disruptive behavior and false energy (but curiously which no one appears to view - pollwise anyways - as "Andy becoming a problem") ... was only released into the public domain here after I had sought and gained Andy's approval for releasing it. Yet he now proceeds to distort that reality by surreptitiously implying that I posted a private email against my code of ethics. Are you good folks waking up to Andy's shenanigans yet?
ps3: Breakfast is waiting. And then I will tell the rest of the story.
|
