AssemblyBoard

This is from an "Online Philipina Dating service."

name:            David Edward Geftakys
email:           ( Email address withheld for privacy )
Subject:         Just wanted to thank u for ur site.

Date:            Monday, July 04, 2005
Time:            09:39:18 AM

message:

     I was looking for a good way to send support to my fiancé in Bohol in the Philippines. we have known each other for nearly 1 yr now and I took a semester out of school to go visit and get to know her. Her name is Edna. We will not b married till I graduate in 2 1/2 years. I am a cadet officer candidate at the California Maritime Academy. It seems like forever! I was brought to tears as I looked at ur pics, read and listened. How familiar it all is.

Thanks so much. I would love to hear from u and am sure u have many emails such as mine to respond to. Thanks again. 

Here is the link
http://www.thedavisplace.com/guestbook/view.htm

I don't know what to think about this, other than David seems to be doing what so many single men his age have done.....gotten a bride from the Philipines.

He also seems to have changed his stance of Divorce and Re-marriage.  He was quite emphatic about a person not being free to re-marry, under any circumstances, when their 'ex was still alive.  In fact, I remember this being a VERY big deal for many divorced singles in the Assembly.  I wonder what changed his views?

Brent

Going back into my shell barring any other strange news

First thought:  Part of me is skeptical because it seems so odd to me that someone would use the full name (especially with such an ususal last name) on something like this knowing that it would be quickly picked up on search engines.  On the other hand, it certainly seems in keeping with David's brazenness in other areas.

Second thought:  He is worried about supporting this new young girl after he was finished trashing his first wife?   ???  One can only marvel at the extent to which he continues to become an even great jerk than that which we formerlly could imagined.

A little over 2 months since your last posting.  Doing good Brent.

I only hope the woman does a Google search on David Geftakys, before she decides whether or not to hitch up with him.  But then maybe life in America would be far better than what she now has.

It is truly hypocritical that leaders cannot practice what they preached.

What a mess.
I was reading the 'grief and loss' and the PB articles referenced on GA.com.  Pretty amazing how aberrant Christian groups can mess up their members' lives.

Marcia

Regardless of what type of religious group they belong to, abusive males exhibit the same patterns of behavior.

You are correct, Moonie.  I suppose abuse is related to upbringing.

The mess is in knowing that he is abusive and has a documented history of abuse, and to then make a decision to pursue marriage with an innocent, possibly ignorant of the facts, woman.  Also, in having messed up the possiblities of marriage for many divorced singles while in the assembly, to now do exactly what he emphatically preached against without a public statement of repentance and apology.

The sad thing is when I see singles still "married" to the assembly and messing up their chances of marriage, because they have been so indoctrinated by these leaders. :P :'( >:D

Marcia

I am less concerned about the "hypocracy" of David doing what he used to preach against.  After all, I do things now that I used to speak out against when I was in the Assembly - celebrate Christmas, own a television, attend a denominational church with a paid pastor.  Many of my stands in the area of practical theology have changed.

I am more grieved over David's pattern of physical and emotional abusiveness and the fact that this young girl sees him as a ticket to come to America, not knowing what she may be getting into.

David doesn't want a wife.  He wants a sister's house with access to the goodies.

RUN, EDNA, RUN! :-[

The delusion continues...so sad...!
Verne

How is it that David finds the means to support himself, let alone his fiance?  Did the "Work" send him that much cash, that he can still live off of it?

I wouldn't worry too much about Edna.  She will find out that this fish hasn't got what she wants, and that his past would indicate a bumpy ride in the future.  Certainly some of the other men she is entertaining are better suited to her goals!

I know of two of these Filipina Internet marriages, both of which involve men who are around 25 years older than their brides.  The men are soon as docile as lambs and their brides rule over them with an iron hand, obtaining airfare and housing for family members who immigrate to the US as soon as possible. 

I don't think David could/would provide this service for Lady Edna!

Also, is it possible that there is another David Edward Geftakys, who attends the Maritime academy?  It certainly doesn't seem likely, neither does it seem likely that someone planted this info, although either are possible. 

It would be nice to ba able to verify this information.

the skeptics's skeptic

Seems that hard-core porn is thrown into this mix, too. It's a dangerous channel.

Who is this masked man? or is it woman?  8)

Marcia

Skeptic,

You said,

Unless you know more than the rest of us, this is nothing more than slander.  In fact, we cannot be certain that this whole thing isn't a hoax.  If it is legit, we still don't know anything about this girl.

Thomas Maddux

Well, in your case, it's entirely possible for almost anyone on the board to more to know more....

Nevertheless, if you read my post you will see that I caution people that it may not be legit...but then, you probably didn't read what I posted for information, only for an angle to educate and inform the board members.

If you look at the dating sites, read between the lines, listen to the phone calls, read the testimonies...you will see that many of these women have several men to choose from.  Certainly she is isn't going to turn down good opportunities waiting for a middle aged man to graduate from school!

This hardly qualifies for slander, quite the opposite, perfesser.

You need to wear an aluminium foil deflector beanie, triple thickness.  Obviously, you are under the influence of Psychotronic mind control.

the skeptic's skeptic

I don't know who this skeptic person is Tom, but I like his/her POV.  Maybe you suffer from the same malady as MarkC does, in that if you don't read/post regularly you miss the flow and sense of the BB communication.  Or if you do, read regularly, you just simply missed the point due to information overload or something.

respectfully,
Marcia

In the spirit of being helful, may I suggest this for Tom?

http://zapatopi.net/afdb/alumeyes.jpg (http://zapatopi.net/afdb/alumeyes.jpg)

the skeptic's skeptic

Funny!! ;D

Is that hellful or helpful??

What I want to know is if the Philippines even exists?

Marcia

Is this really even possible in David G's case though?  I wonder... :)
Verne

The concern for slander was against the girl, not David, Verne.

How this got started is that skeptic said:
"Certainly some of the other men she is entertaining are better suited to her goals!"

This came across like she is some slut with multiple boyfriends.  This, I believe, is what Tom objected to.

Instead of Skeptic clarifing his statements (that he meant multiple contacts on the board, not multiple intimate relationships), he just started insulting Tom.

Dave, wear a beanie!  It helps, and it helps a lot.


If you took the time to look at the website that David Edward Geftakys posted on, and followed some of their links, you would discover that Filipinas voluntarily put their bios and pictures on the web, for the purpose of obtaining a husband. 

Using the beanie, in order to clear the mind from Psychotronic influence, it becomes apparent that these women have the option of meeting, corresponding with...or not, with any men that may show interest in their profiles on the web.  It could be that several men have varying degrees of interest in one or more women, simultaneously.

That's not slander, my good man.  That's just the bleeding obvious.  No suggestion of sluttiness was ever intended, or made.

You also said this:  Instead of Skeptic clarifing his statements (that he meant multiple contacts on the board, not multiple intimate relationships), he just started insulting Tom.


Again, I understand that you are unprotected, and are under the influence of PMC, so I excuse your comment.  However, if for no other reason than to further impress upon you the need for a properly constructed Aluminium Foil Deflector Beanie, AFDB, ....

The Moderator should have said,  "skeptic, can you clarify what you mean by this?  Do you mean that she has mulitple contacts through the Internet, or that she is a slut?

It is not encumbent on me to sort out who is and who isn't under the influence of PMC and the rudeness that is one of it's chief symptoms.   

Had you been wearing a beanie, you would have noticed the even keeled, reasonable nature of my post.  You would not have seen the word "slut," nor would you have read the hidden phrase "multiple boyfriends," in my post.  Again, the reason you did is due to PMC.  Wear the beanie lad,  wear the beanie.

Tom insulted me by popping off with the slander comment when it was totally unwarranted.  That's all.

Wear the beanie!

the skeptic's skeptic

---

Editor's note:  skeptic typed: Certainly some of the other men she is entertaining are better suited to her goals!"" 
It must be understood that to a person who is unshielded from Psychotronic Mind Control, the phrase actually looks like this:

Certainly <this slut is entertaining multiple boyfriends>some of the other men she is entertaining <having kinky long-distant phone sex with> are better suited to her goals."

this whole board is rife with PMC and PHTML code.  (Psychotronic Hypertext Markup Language)  If you don't wear a beanie, you can't help but be influenced like dear Dave and Tom.....It's not their fault, to them it really said all that.

---

Tom and Dave,  I suspect that you are first borns.  The ability to pick on one possible problem with a post, and miss the message of the post.  I know people like that who pride themselves for their editorial skills.  Bugs me to bits, though I am a first born myself.  Maybe, you are indeed suffering from information overload.  KISS.

Marcia

Got it
I did not at all consider the observation made to be uncharitable though. Blunt, yes, but hardly slanderous in view of the apparent facts...
Verne

ps Of coursed if she indeed received a visit from David, to say nothing about accepting financial support, that may suggest that she has already somewhat narrowed the field no?  ;)

Skeptic:

Your ambiguous statement was misunderstood.  It may have been unwarrantedly misunderstood and we may have read into the post our pre-conceived notions about pick-up web sites.   Nevertheless, it was simply misunderstood.  Instead of being a decent human being and saying, "look, that's not what I meant; you read into my words something that wasn't there" or "what do you mean by slander?  I'm not following you." , you take off flagrantly insulting everyone.

You're not attempting to communicate.  You are meeting some other self-serving need by belittling others.

You can now return to your metal beanie gag as it seems to really float your boat.

---

Marcia:

No, I am not a firstborn.  My issue was not with the post.  Tom made a statement which I may or may not agree with.  Skeptic turns around and open fires with insults.  I was only trying to clarity what I thought Tom might have been saying to bring peace to the situation.  More insults.  Simplicity isn't the issue.  At attempt to communicate is.  Unfortunately, that isn't Skeptic's goal.

I believe that what we have is history.  Tom often misunderstands.  The reason: Maybe not enough time on board to get the flow/sense of the communication?  Maybe too much information?  Maybe something else...

The effect is that we are now side tracked from the message of the post to "you should have said it this way", just because Tom misunderstood yet again.

I actually like what Tom has to say, on its own merit, but not in the way it is sometimes used to respond to a poster's comment.

The subtle comments I have made in the past have possibly not been understood, so that was my blunt straightforward opinion stated for all to see.

Re. the beanie "insults".  Dave, lighten up.  Some of you guys are too touchy and sensitive.  If it was directed at me, I would have laughed and dished it right back.

Good will to all.
Marcia

Back to the original topic of this thread--I emailed the couple who run the website David posted on. Here is my email and their reply:

Hello Josie and Delaney--

I don't know what is your level of involvement with the matchmaking reported
on your site, but I have a concern about one of the men who has posted a
message about his Filippina fiance. His name is David Geftakys. This man was
divorced by his wife after 20+ years of domestic violence. There is a
restraining order filed in the court of California against him. A web search
on the name "David Geftakys" will bring up quite a bit of information. I
hope Edna is fully informed about what she might be getting into.

I personally knew David and his wife before they were married in the early
70s, until 1990. I and am sure that the man signed on your site is the same
person.

Sincerely,
Margaret Irons

*******************************************************************************

Hello Margaret,

The only thing we know about David Geftakys is that he entered our Form
Email and made his comments after visiting our sites.
Also we just received an email from him requesting that we remove his entry,
which was strange, but we honored the request.

Sorry we do not have any information on Edna other than what he provided in
his email to us.

This type thing is always a concern for both the man and the woman.  I know
Josie had to attend a class
advising the Filipina of the dangers and what to do if they encounter any
problems with the husband.

For the man, a very through process and background regarding ex-wives has to
be completed for the Immigration Dept. to allow a Filipina to come to the
US.  It is much more difficult now than it was several years ago.  However
as far as I know of today, they still do not require a Police or FBI check
in all states.

Thanks for your message to us and hopefully everything will be okay if they
continue their relationship.

Delaney & Josie Davis

**************************************************************************************
Interesting that David deleted his post. I suppose chances are he got wind that it was being discussed here.

Dave,

Are you trying to say,  "I blew this out of proportion and read something into the post that wasn't there?" 

Or, are you saying,  "I may have misunderstood something, but the fact that you're an indecent person, and the fact that I was trying to bring peace to the situation and all you did was flagrantly insult everyone means that even if I did something wrong, I have no need to admit it, humble myself apologize or even consider it."

I'm not sure if you are apologizing, or making an oblique swipe at me.  Your message is garbled due to the extremely heavy PMC around you, which has effected the hypocampus and cingular lobe of your brain.  Use the beanie lad.  You'll see yourself in a whole different light.

In Belgium, we have the custom of apologizing if our error causes a fuss.  If we are embroiled in a fuss that we didn't cause, we attempt to clear the matter up.  Of course, we have taken extreme steps to protect ourselves from PMC, so relationships are much more honest and forthright as a result.

It is perfectly clear to everyone that our esteemed moderator read the PHTML version of the statement, and reacted the way he did.  He can't really apologize for something he doesn't understand, and neither can you.   What is so obvious to everyone else is simply unfathomable to you, because you need to DePsych.  (Lighten up)

I accept your apology,  <disdain for others>  , when you said that you were sorry <angry> that my goal wasn't communication. <I'm not as smart or godly as you, and should leave ASAP>.  You are most kind to offer it.  Let's start afresh, shall we?  <Dave Sable will never admit a mistake, Tom Maddux will never admit he overreacted, we are the spititual fathers, older and wiser.   We do not need to admit a mistake, we need not apologize>

Dave, wear the beanie.  I suspect that due to Psychotronic Mind Control, you will get sidetracked and disgronified with this post as well. 

Extra fiber in the diet, along with warm prune juice before bed also helps.

Nevertheless, thanks for your gracious, humble apology. 

skeptic

PS, I didn't flagrantly insult everyone, as you claim, only you and Tom. 

---

Here's something else to keep in mind:  do you suppose that it's possible that some of these women on the websites collect "support" from more than one man?  It would make a good scam, no?  <jump on him for slander> For that matter, is it even possible that someone would stoop so low as to take financial advantage of lonely men, using sexy, younger women as bait? 

Probably not, the Internet is rarely used for shady business. <pay no attention to the facts, react against him and castigate him for tone and style.  He is less of a person than you are>

Good work Margaret!

Admirable. And also necessary in my humble opinion.
Just think of what might have been prevented had some of those who knew all about Mr.Geftakys  taken even the slightest initiative to alert others?
The couple's response clearly indicated they have no idea what kind of person they are dealing with and that is understandable given the lack of history.
Nonetheless, they have been warned.
This is more than many of us got with the apostate Geftakys.
Verne

In an attempt to look at the positive aspects of this, I should point out the following:

David hasn't died of Diabetes yet....in spite of his claims of being mortally ill for all those years.

And this is the big one.....

Money is flowing FROM David,  TO someone else.  That's huge.

In all honesty, I do wish the guy would just admit what he did, and who he is, get his career going and start fresh.  It just strikes me as rather odd that he would abandon the principles on marriage and divorce, send money to someone he barely knows, AND maintain that he was being persecuted and was innocent of all wrong doing.

If the latter was true, why would he not continue on serving God, and not entangle himself in adultery.  He preached often that re-marriage was sin....if he believes this, what is he doing?

skeptic

Continue on serving God? Fact is he never did.
This is hardly anything new. He is being the person he always was, just without a cadre of sycophants to cover and excuse his perversion. The extreme legalism practiced in the assemblies - interminable meetings, no television, no dating, no marriage, no re-marriage, stultifying and painstaking detail about meal preparation, consequences, etc. etc. ad nauseam, had one purpose and one purpose only - contol and subjugation of the masses. All the crowing about the "Testimony to Jesus" was nothing short of high blasphemy in view of the way many of the these crowers, including the head rooster, were behaving secretly. Nothing was insisted on for reasons of conviction or principle.
The demise of the assemblies has served to reveal many of us for what we truly are...
Verne

Maybe we can cut a deal with Edna and get some of our money back.

Margaret, Great that you wrote.  Hope the message gets through to Edna.

Marcia

---

Dave S. and TomM

Recently I was with a group of people and a couple of us were conversing with a brother about his Mum's poor health.  Another person entered the room and asked "Wow, what kind of flowers are those?" or something like that.  That killed the conversation and started another about the beautiful flowers.  I was very ticked off because I really did not care how beautiful the flowers were, I was more interested in listening to the brother tell us about his mother.  I did not show my anger at the time, but if I had, it would have been pathetic if I got exhorted for getting angry rather than exhort the person who had been rude.

Tom, sorry to have to say this, but it has been happening for a while now.  We have a discussion going on, and you remain offline.  Then all of a sudden you don't just enter in, but rather you tend to butt in with some sort of related comment to educate or exhort us.  The discussion goes off on a side track, which is very frustrating, and we are all supposed to keep our cool and be impressed with your wisdom.  Then one loses it, and the one who loses it gets exhorted for losing it.  IMO your behaviour is more GG-like than the one who loses it is.  This all reminds me of how the local LBs deal with 'issues'.  Maybe there is some of the LB mentality still residing deep within.  Something to consider anyway.

Respectfully,
Marcia

aha!  You're wearing your properly contructed AFDB I see!!  :D

So, in order to clarify what you said above, do you mean the following?

Brent brought to everyone's attention that David G. had publicly stated that he was in the process of getting a Fillipina bride.

Skeptic said that we should wait to find out if it was legit or not, and not to worry too much about Edna, as she probably had other men better suited to her purposes.  (Finding an American husabnd)

Tom stepped in and changed the subject by saying,  "Unless you know more than the rest of US, this is slander."  Tom was analogous to the one who changed the topic to flowers.

Skeptic got ticked off and then, instead of Tom being taken to task for changing the subject arbitrarily, skeptic was exhorted for what he said.

Is this right? <Dave, ignore the clear attempt at communication here.  You have nothing to learn, but much to teach others>

Does the AFDB help, or what!! ;D

To quote from "My Fair lady"
By jove, s/he's got it!!

Lady Edna might be good for DavidG.  A new kind of bondage where someone else controls him and his resources for the benefit of Edna's family.

"I want to live in America."

Got to go.
Marcia

I think this has real possibilities!  ;D



I think it is safe to say that many of us who were in any way influenced by George Geftakys developed the unhealthy and ungracious habit of looking down our noses at others, particularly other Christians.
It has been one of the hardest things for me to deal with. I have learned, that even when I think I may be better instructed than others on some particular topic, it may well be far more gracious to keep my mouth shut. This is certainly one of the more valuable lessons of my BB participation.  :)
Verne

You forgot the part where you turned to the woman who changed the subject and said, "You are the stupidest person in this room.  You should wear a colander on your head to get some brain cells working."  I wish you just said, "yes, the flowers are nice, but getting back to mum . . ."

  To Marcia and Skeptic:

   I would like to offer a testimonial, of sorts, as regards the use of of the metal helmet; and just to show how well it is working, I will not jump into this conversation via my former "malady" of moderating without sufficient knowledge.

   I am a little concerned about wearing the helmet, however, as we have had some lightning strikes in the area and wonder if it might not be dangerous?

  Folks have looked at me funny out in public, but I continue secure in the knowledge that the mind controlling rays are not getting through!

  I took the helmet off for a moment (how else can I wash my hair?) and when I did an ol' Country Western song by Tex Ritter came back to mind, "My Fillipino Baby", but when I put the helmet back on I knew that the BB would not be the place to share the lyrics!

                                           God Bless,  Mark C.

   

This is exactly the problem Dave.  You have this superior attitude hence you cannot relate to us mere fallibles.

We all have a history on this BB Dave.  Do you think that I would not have taken that route had it been possible?  When does something get frustrating?  Clue, think back to your assembly days.  A 'reaction' is usually because of history.

Consider even the Biblical method.  First you attempt to talk to the individual.  Then take 2 or 3 witnesses.  Then...   The approach is based on the past history of how things have gone before.

Dave, you are so serious.  You make something that could be funny sound so terrible.  Lighten up and laugh a bit.

Marcia


Mark,

In a previous post I only used you to illustrate a point.  I honestly feel that you make a good effort to be up to date as much as it is possible for you to be.

Now that you have a beanie, all you need is a set of alumeyes and you can change the tune to "I can see clearly now". ;)

Have fun.

Blessings,
Marcia

Good points Mark,

Lightning:
Are AFDBs dangerous to wear during lightning storms? The risk of being struck by lightning has more to do with where you are than what you are wearing. An AFDB -- or any metallic object in your immediate possession -- may increase your chances of being hit, but that increase is negligible compared to the increase chance due to being in a area at high lightning strike risk. In other words, if you are standing on a hill in a lightning storm you're in danger no matter what you are wearing. AFDB bedecked people in lightning-safe areas are at no more immediate, measurable risk than their mind control-addled neighbors. In fact, people without AFDBs during lightning storms are at higher long-term risk for the following reasons:

Any psychotronic signals that they are receiving may be altered by the electrical fields of the storm causing them to behave erratically -- possibly violently -- putting themselves at risk for personal injury.
A mind control agent could issue them commands that cause them to step into the storm, putting themselves at risk of lightning strike.
If the lightning storm is very destructive, FEMA agents may arrive on the scene (with portable psychotrons in tow) to assess damage and psychotronically inculcate dependency and submission to the Federal Father in any unAFDBed victims.

Dear SS!

 (note: the use of this abbrev. in no way is meant to send a hidden controlled beta vibe suggesting Sceptic is a Nazi.)


   Your clear thinking skills and grip on the technicals surrounding the phenomena of mind control have been a great blessing to me.

   Since I seem to be getting such great answers on all my questions re. this from you (your explanation on "the danger of lightning strikes" was a great relief to me).

1.)   Could you please elaborate a little on the "serious lightning strike" issue where "FEMA" appears on site in the role of a Father?
  I understood it perfectly, but I'm sure there are those who might have been confused and need some history in order to understand the proper context of your comments.

2.)  I heard you mention to Dave that while wearing the helmet we should also be drinking some "warm prune juice."

    I put my thinking cap on (literally) and the thought came to mind that this is intended to purge out from the body any remnants of mind controlling substances, but am wondering how this helps one's thinking.

3.) Marcia mentioned wearing the aluminum piece over the eyes, but I have great difficulty while driving (I'm a truck driver) with these.  I received some strange looks from the cops at the Chicken coops (weigh stations), but as they are used to seeing strange things they only shook their heads. (what do they know!)

   Well, I guess I'll leave it at three questions, because 2 aren't enough and 4 are too many.

                   God bless you and your ministry,   Mark C.

OK, OK.  I do indeed see the humor in the worn-out aluminum beanie joke.  Maybe for next time the better thing to say would be, "Hey, Tom and Dave.  Lighten up.  We're only joking around.  We understand that Tom just read the post wrong" instead of continuing to heap insults, screwing around with my profile, and attempting to blame Tom for the ruckus even though he hasn't even participated in the discussion since his original post.

Clear thinking Mark,

A couple of hints:

Protection for eyes, ears, etc.  Really, this one is a "no-brainer."  The eyes and ears are gateways to the mind, and by covering them, we can insure that no outside influence can enter our minds.  Of course, they may be uncovered for short periods, as necessary, but should remain covered when not in use.

Coins.  Many coins are actually amplifiers for Psychotronic signals, with the exception of Canadian coins. Modern paper currency, with the "stip" imbedded, are also  Psychotronic signal enhancers.  Try to get paid in all copper, or old paper money, whenever possible.

FEMA.  Please note that they don't come on the scene in the role of father, but as AGENTS OF FEDERAL FATHER.  They pump out psychotronic commands in order to get everyone more dependent after the disaster.  We see right through them, however.

Prune juice.  Plenty of people would make a strong argument that this one should be number 2.  Nevertheless, many psychotronic commands are seemingly harmless...or are they?  Ever wonder why diet soda is popular?  Slim Jim's?  Starburst?   Many of the commands are simply to get the unshielded people to eat junk food.....that is laced with silicon dioxide....that enhances susceptibility to psychotronic mind control.  This creates grumpy, stodgy, people, and darn near guarantees they will remain oblivious to the effects of PMC, even with a beanie on.  The mind may be secure, but the body continues to receive PBC (Psychotronic Body Control)  A person who has consumed the government approved food, drank the government approved water, carried the government minted coins.....well, they don't stand a chance.

However, if such a person  wears a beanie, and purges the body of Psychotronic enhancing residue....they stand a good chance at being able to see the Big Picture.  (BP)

All of this serves very well to explain why people behave in the ways that they do, especially one's who can't see themselves as they really are.

S'sS

Dave, if you're using a worn out beanie, it may not be fully shielding you, although I can see that it is helping.  Use the prune juice as well, and really think about contructing a new beanie, or buying one on Ebay.

Just to set the record straight, Tom hasn't participated in the thread, so I was attempting to blame the person who had been.....you.   You may not remember, due to the PMC.

Again, just to refresh your memory, you stated that I implied that a certain woman was a slut, entertaining multilple boyfriends.  That's pretty rude, especially in light of the fact that I did no such thing.  You read that into my post, <this halfway admission is good enough, do not, under any circumstances issue a real apology>    in a manner that can only be explained by the fact that you are reading the PHTML code, and obeying it's commands.

Here's my testimony:

I used to see myself as a handsome guy, wearing a blue hat, with a really nice mustache.  It turns out that I was actually a raving lunatic, hard-wired with Geftakys installed psychotronic hardware, and merely perceived myself as the dapper fellow!  You can see both versions of the OLD me in my avatar.
S'sS

Re. "Maybe for next time the better thing to say would be,..."
Chances are that we'll end up doing it our individual way and not your way, so I hope you won't be disappointed.

Re. "attempting to blame Tom for the ruckus even though he hasn't even participated in the discussion since his original post."
IMO you present quite a twisted perspective of the events.  The fact that Tom's involvement was minimal in this discussion does not change the fact of the effect of his comment that started this, and the effect that comments by him, and some others, have in sidetracking a perfectly good discussion.


There is another matter.  This is a list of the top ten posters:

Brent T  1620
VerneCarty  1536
al Hartman, aka Weird al  1280
Marcia  1064
Tom Maddux  1034
Joe Sperling  805
Arthur  801
Mark C.  771
David Mauldin  651
Dave Sable  575

There are a couple in the list that never apologize, or at least I cannot remember that they have, could be oldstimers.  Most of us fallibles make mistakes and offend and misunderstand others and then we apologize, but some just don't.  The BB, and life in general, is an opportunity for learning and growing don't you think?  Local LBs (my broken record :-[) are like that, in that they'll preach about forgive and forget rather than apologize and admit that they have made an error in judgement.

Marcia

Marcia,

You wrote:

There are a couple in the list that never apologize, or at least I cannot remember that they have, could be oldstimers. 

To an unshielded person it looks like this:  (due to PHTML)

There are a couple in the list  <I am not one of those, in fact I'm not even on the list.  This doesn't apply to me.>  that never apologize, or at least I cannot remember that they have, could be oldstimers. 

Marcia,

You said,

Our anonymous "Skeptic's Skeptic" made a comment this young woman "servicing" other men.

Without going into detail, most folks with my background would understand that to mean that he/she/it was calling her a whore.

That, admittedly, could be the case.  However, many of these girls are victims of a hideously evil system.  They have been brutalized by a culture in which little girls are sold to whoremongers who then rent their bodies to perverts who travel all the way to places like Thailand and the Philippines to have sex with children.  Edna might well be a victim of this system.

She also could be an opportunistic girl who, like thousands of others, is willing to trade her services as a "wife" to some wealthy American for a few years in exchange for a chance to live in the USA, and perhaps to also bring family members over as well.

For some of these girls, this is the only opportunity they see.  Their physical attractiveness to men is their only "asset".  They lack education or family connections, and see this as a way out of a dirt floor existence.  

As sad as this is, it hardly amounts to being a whore.

Finally, the way I was brought up, decent folks just don't go around calling girls whores.  If thinking that way means I have residual leading brotherism....then I guess just about all the people I have ever known have it too.

Thomas Maddux

Tom, that is why I mentioned "information overload" as being a possible reason for your misunderstanding.  I did not see it that way when I read skeptic's post.  I know someone who got himself a Philippino wife; it was simply done via a Philipino dating service like any other dating service.  Yes, it also means a better life in Canada for the wife.

You said this in response to skeptic's post:


Residual LBism was more in context of sidetracking and which leads to frustration.

Marcia

Wear the beanie, and take a double dose of warm prune juice.

Never did I say a woman was servicing other men, neither did I call anyone a whore!  Not even Dave Sable did that, he used the words,  "boyfriends," and "slut."

I'm not sure what you mean by "most folks with my background," but I find it disturbing that you have no compunction about reading strong offensive language into someone's words, when it isn't even there!

Furthermore, I have since clarified my statement in order to leave no doubt whatsoever about my meaning.

We have only 2 options that can explain this behavior from you:

1.)You are under the influence of psychotronic mind control

or

2.)You are letting your malicious nature, and pride make it impossible to back down and apologize when you are clearly wrong.  This, in spite of the fact that anyone can see the silly lengths you go to to justify yourself.

I choose to believe that you are under PMC, and know that you will be right as rain with some prune juice and a beanie.

S'sS

This guy is a real spook.  ;D

Does anyone know when DG gets out of that school he's in?

Do the math, Scruffy.  My guestimate is around the end of 2007.

al

duh...sorry. Thanks for the clarification.

...of course, that's if the "school" doesn't run aground or sink! :o ::) ;D ;D ;D

Well,  "the Reef is near"  :-X Smash! ;D