Re: Kents 'specific' Baha'i Technique behaviour

On Mar 29, 5:33 am, "Kent Johnson" <k...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The issue, Rod, as you well know, is that I don't believe you.

No Kent. "The issue" is that when I publicly discuss the failings of
the Baha'i
community you become so full of raw blind hate you stoop to the
mockery
of a case of pack rape to try to get back at me.

You are yet to provide a single example of my having "misdirected" or
lied.

So much of what you write is wrong,

Your problem Kent is that while you keep making such assertions about
my being "wrong" or using "trickery" or "subterfuge" motivated by
"malice"
you have never once provided *any* evidence.
Lord...You can't even identify what it is I am supposed to be "wrong"
about.

when I checked it out, that in the case of the
rape, if it occurred several decades ago, of a 16 year old girl that was
brought to my attention through a link to a local Australian newspaper....


Several rapes against minors occurred twenty to thirty years ago...the
allegations
had been brought to court and public attention on a number of
occasions.
When the accused holds Federal Government office with a budget of $1.5
million it is not surprising files go missing and cases do not
proceed. It is
however surprising that if no rape occurred a "local Australian
newspaper", The
Age, would dare run a major article entitled 'Power and Rape' for
which the journalist
won Australias highest award for investigative journalism.
Then there is the fact that despite the time taken to achieve a
conviction
the accused has been convicted in a civil case and ordered to pay
compensation.

If there was such a rape, the only reason anyone on BeliefNet believed it
was because of your emotionalism.

Kent...at least two other people on that board (one Baha'i, one
Christian) had been
following the story for years and based their understanding on the
independent links,
articles and reports.
When you read the link you came to the conclusion that a man who had
been dead
for several years was the same man just convicted of rape.

After weeks of your unexplained accusations of lies, subterfuge,
trickery and deception
this is the *first time* you have suggested that you doubt any rape
transpired.

Here's the bottom line Kent....No doubt the 'ethics' will escape you-

It does not matter if 'you' do not believe the *FIVE* women who claim
they had been
pack raped as minors.
It does not matter if 'you' do not believe the award winning
journalism of a National
newspaper who carried the story with no libel suit brought against
them.
It does not matter if 'you' do not accept the verdict of a jury in a
civil rape case.
It does not matter if 'you' do not believe or trust my links to all
these *facts*.

What matters is that any decent person- anyone with a moral compass-
DOES NOT USE A CASE OF PACK RAPE AS A TOOL TO MOCK
AND VILIFY ANOTHER>>> DOES NOT MAKE FUN OF RAPE<<<
DOES NOT PISSTAKE AND POINTSCORE ON THE BACK OF RAPE.

To do so is behaviour repugnant to all decent people.

To do so demonstrates the amoral depths that practitioners of the
Baha'i Technique
will stoop to.

There was no evidence, beyond the link you provided,

There is a mountain of "evidence" *BEGINNING* with the links I
provided.

Here are the links you falsely asserted lead 'nowhere' and to
'nothing'

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/woman-tells-of-second-clark-gang-rape/2007/01/18/1168709880925.html

http://150.theage.com.au/view_bestofarticle.asp?straction=update&inttype=1&intid=114

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=72700

They provide a 'start' for anyone who seeks to objectively investigate
the story.
(As will the repost here of the 'Well well well' thread)

They do not provide false information or "misdirection" and they
certainly do not provide ANY EXCUSE FOR SOMEONE TO MOCK AND PISSTAKE
THE PACK RAPE OF A MINOR!

and no reason to believe it ever happened,

You are not asked or required to believe a rape "ever happened"...that
is not your
job. Your (near impossible) task is to develop the moral and ethical
insight to realise
that wether or not you "believe it ever happened" it is totally
inappropriate- scummy low behaviour- to mock, pisstake and Baha'i
Technique pointscore using *ANY* case of rape- real or alleged, true
or false, proven or unproven, convicted or unconvicted.

IT'S NOT ABOUT *YOU* BELIEVING THERE WAS A RAPE KENT- IT'S ABOUT YOU
USING *RAPE* AS A SOURCE OF
BAHA'I TECHNIQUE MOCKERY- DERRISSION- PISSTAKE AND POINTSCOREING.

since so much of what you say is misdirection, and just plain wrong.

So, in your obsessive Baha'i Technique manner, you keep accusing-
"misdirection",
"trickery", "malice", "subterfuge", "deception", "lies" and "just
plain wrong."
Never once pausing to explain, justify or substantiate.

Even now you repeat the allegation of error and "misdirection" but you
cannot identify a single mistake, bad link, false information,
misdirection or lie.

That is the point, Rod.

The "*point*" Kent seems beyond the range of your embryonic ethics
and moribund morality.

When the woman in the rape case made her allegation there was a
requirement that *evidence* be presented...she did so and won on the
basis of sufficient evidence.
You operate on a principle of repetitious baseless allegation devoid
of explanation let alone evidence...when that fails you stoop to making
fun of the pack rape of children.

In doing so you have dragged the Baha'i Technique to its lowest
point.....and in doing so made it starkly clear and concrete



.

Relevant Pages