From: John Velez <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 13:02:26 -0500 Fwd Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 07:31:51 -0500 Subject: Re: Psychological Trauma - Velez >From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com> >Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 11:53:09 EST >Subject: Re: Psychological Trauma >To: email@example.com >>Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2001 10:43:42 -0500 >>To: firstname.lastname@example.org >>From: John Velez <email@example.com> >>Subject: Re: Psychological Trauma >>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com> >>>Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 15:57:30 EST >>>Subject: Re: Psychological Trauma >>>To: firstname.lastname@example.org ><snip> >>Hello Kevin, >>You write: >>>The real point is the abduction researchers know what is >>>happening but they fail to understand the significance. And >>>that, I believe, is the point that Jim is making. >>I find it amusing that Jim made his point so 'clearly' that >>everybody else has to (interpret) "guess" as to what he may have >>meant. I'm going to ask you the same thing as I asked >>Mortelarro; >Somehow, John, I think you do this on porpoise. I mean, avoid >the huge door in your mind which I know is there. I've seen >glimpses of it when we were... uh... the rage. Before the rage. >I would aks a question of your question... you wrote: Hello "Docca" You write: >>I find it amusing that Jim made his point so 'clearly' that >>everybody else has to (interpret) "guess" as to what he may have >>meant. >Uh, just who is "everybody," you excepted? Now you speak for >this List as well as yourself and the abductees? Nope, I was referring to Kevin. And I never claim to speak for anyone but myself. Check all past e-mails. :) >I guess your guess is not as good as mine... ours. Whatever. See that's my "point" Docca. I'm not "guessing." The comments I have made in this thread regarding the people Budd has worked with are based on _first_hand_ knowledge. Unlike your own. Do the math "Docca." I attended four, sometimes as many as six, of Budd's meetings each year for five-and-a-half years. An average of twenty to thirty of his clients attended each meeting. Budd went out of his way to invite -different- folks each time so that they could _all_ get a chance to attend one of his get together's at least once. Because of my _work_ relationship with Budd, and because I was the webmaster of IF, they would all go out of their way to catch me after meetings to meet me and ask questions or engage me in what were mostly very lively conversations. You conveniently forget that I worked very closely with Budd for all that time. Don't take _my_ word for it, call Budd, ask him. Call Greg Sandow, ask him. I was the guy that _developed_ IF into what it eventually became, a broad-based service organization for those who seek help or information about UFO abduction. Because of the nature of my position/function as webmaster of the Intruders Foundation I, (of necessity) came into _direct_contact_ with almost _all_ of the 'local' clients that Budd acquired. It was _Budd_ who asked me to call them and to talk to them. So you see, I actually worked and socialized with the group of people whose intelligence and individuality you are insulting. It is the sole reason I am 'on you like white on rice' over this _public_lie_ you have told about them. (That they all agree with the respective researchers 'take' on the subject.) BS! In a slip, or a moment of lucidity you yourself have stated that the 'few' of these individuals that you have met all "impressed" you with the diversity of their views. Which is in direct contradiction to the claim you make about all of them "sharing" a "point of view". You make them sound like mindless drones that are incapable of having an original thought on their own. I'm not only 'calling' you on it, I publicly challenge you to substantiate it. Something that after three or four of these posts you have yet to do. Mucho talk-o, no proof-o! ;) >>Show me the poll or the interviews with a substantial group of >>either Budd, David, or John Mack's clients that substantiates >>these outrageous claims that they 'uniformly' all share the >>_same_ point of view as the individual researchers in question? >I cannot do that, Johnny, I would be exposing several >confidences. And you know how you get whenever that happens. Not true. Because you can't. How many is "several" three? Four? I want to know how many - not their names - of either Hopkins', Jacobs', or Mack's case studies you polled or interviewed in order to _substantiate_ your insulting and outrageous claim that they all agree with the viewpoints of the researchers in question. You can't do that, so you dance and dance as fast as you can and still you do not _answer_ my simple but relevant question. Substantiate your claim that all of the abductees that any of the aforementioned gentlemen have hypnotized, all agree with their respective points of view. It's simple Jimbo, either you admit that you have absolutely nothing to back up the claim, or provide the total number of Budd, David, and John's clients that you interviewed _before_ you publicly posted this _blatant_ and insulting lie about them. Well can you? I don't want to hear all the extraneous crap you are throwing at me. Just the answer to that one simple question. >>As opposed to Mortellaro or even yourself, I actually _know_ >>these folks personally. I'm telling you that you're both dead >>wrong in your statements. Please tell me _how many_ of Budd, >>David's or John's clients you polled or interviewed. >I told you in another post. However I am certain you will get to >that. I would be interested in another poll. How many on this >List agree with Mack, Kevin and myself as opposed to your opine? >Not that I invite others in to this frayed loop, or is it a >thread? Whatever. But I'd be darned interested in a poll of >UpDates. >Hey, out there... in the void? Whaddya say? Takers? Yeah "Void", are you listening? Jim's in trouble here, he cannot possibly substantiate the outrageous claim that he has made and now his shoe is firmly stuck in his mouth. Can any of you help him to dislodge it please? Just point to the poll or study that was made of Hopkins', Jacobs', and Mack's clients that substantiates Jim's insulting claim about all these folks. A collective group of individuals that represents many hundreds of people. Help Jim, he really needs it. John Velez A.I.C. - Abduction Information Center www.spacelab.net/~jvif/default.htm email@example.com "Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind."
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp