Lyme Disease - Raising the Standard for Communications on this Newsgroup

Author

Raising the Standard for Communications on this Newsgroup

pmerv@direcway.com

2005-10-24, 1:32 am

we could start more civilized discourse here if
1. people would agree to call others only the names they have chosen
for themselves or a neutral abbreviation
2. people would address the ISSUES ONLY and not substitute personal
attacks for real evidence or arguments on an issue.
I will pray for that.

Cytyzens Agaynst Lyme Cryme wrote:
> <derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1129944526.228539.51460@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...3&RS=PN/5618533
>
> Dirtyman,
> please stop your screaming.
> You are crowding out all the negative space on the monitor.
> Is your Tourette's acting up today?
> Poor baby.
> I'm going to include you in my prayers tonight.
>
> CALC

Martijn

2005-10-24, 1:32 am

Greatcod

2005-10-24, 1:32 am

We are like pitbulls with fingers.

mockingbird

2005-10-24, 1:32 am

I have no problems abiding by these guidelines...provided dritteman,
chuck, etc. agree to stop referring to kathleen as "kathloon" and using
other insulting language, claiming that she's insane (she's not
insane), etc.

if these individuals will agree to treat everyone on this board with
respect, then they will also receive respect.

no one on this board is insane. this is a legal term which implies that
the individual is unable to discern right from wrong wrt the law. I am
not aware of any members of this board being adjudged "insane", either
now or in the past.

as far as I know, most people have varying levels of disability, but no
one is currently being confined to mental institutions or prison, etc.

if dritteman and chuck, etc. show that they are able to confine their
disagreements with kathleen and others to arguments such as "you're
wrong, and this is why I think you are wrong" rather than engaging in
hysterical character assassinations, constantly drudging up incidents
from the past, etc., then I think the board will become much more
civil.

and I too will abide by this protocol.

just because a person has been treated (note the past tense) in a
mental hospital for a misdiagnosed organic brain disease or has been in
other extreme situations because they have been afflicted with this
horrible ailment does not logically equate to a current status as
insane, crazy, etc.

I would also add that we should all be careful with off topic posts.
whether you love bush or hate him, or are obsessed with the war in
Iraq, these topics generally have nothing directly to do with lyme
disease. If you can demonstrate otherwise, fine. If not, I'm sure there
are other boards more suited to these topics.

you get out of something what you put into it, and it should come as no
surprise to the identities chuck and dritteman that they are referred
to as "cocksuckers" or worse, when they themselves are calling people
"assholes", "sick twisted bitches", "steamy piles of dog shit" etc. and
cruelly needling individuals about the tragedies which have enveloped
them and their families (children taken away, etc.)

I can forget the past. the real question is...can they????

pmerv@direcway.com

2005-10-24, 1:32 am

here's why this protocol probably won't work:

You wrote:
"if these individuals will agree to treat everyone on this board with
respect, then they will also receive respect. "

What you are saying is that others' rudeness and insensitivity excuses
your own rudeness and insensitivity. I don't think it does, but I am
only one person. I will try to be polite and respectful myself even if
others are rude and insensitive. I reserve the right to protest rude
and insensitive behavior in a polite and respectful way.

And I will continue to pray for this newsgroup.

CaliforniaLyme

2005-10-24, 1:32 am

Me too. And I will try to do my best to conduct myself treating others
with respect.

It is hard being taunted by this anti-Semetic racist awful imposter
though. Sometimes it makes me upset, like when it wrote things re my
husband the day after his sister died. Oh well.

mockingbird

2005-10-24, 1:32 am

I'm not excusing my own rudeness and insensitivity, phyllis.

I'm not even referring to such language as rudeness or insensitivity.

there is a fundamental difference between using perjorative language
against someone (or someones) who cannot restrain themselves from
launching repeated and vicious ad hominem attacks on individuals who
are afflicted with an organic brain disease, and someone who treats
others with respect.

perhaps you feel that drittemann and chuck and others fall into the
latter category.

what I stated, essentially, was that I was willing to forego the use of
"unacceptable" and impolite language (completely subjective terms, by
the way) if others would agree to reciprocate in kind.

as I understand it, the main reason if not the only reason that
drittemann and chuck post here at all is to ridicule those who espouse
theories which implicate the "establishment" in scandalous behavior.
Usually, these individuals utilize ad hominem attacks accentuating an
individuals "insanity" or an individuals difficulties in life (losing
children, etc.), and often post facetious or misleading responses
which, in addition to being abusive, when carefully analyzed, are found
either not in response to a post or deliberately mischaracterize what
someone else has posted.

the reason for this is clear enough to me....when you google a
lyme-related topic, many of these posts are found in the search
results. Thus, what happens within the confines of this group, the
information which is posted, is generally accessible to the internet
community (unlike lymenet posts, for instance).

this is why these people exist. they cannot let these posts go
unanswered. it is part of a propaganda campaign. and the most effective
way to discredit someone is to smear them, paint them as crazy.
drittemann and chuck and others have demonstrated a general lack of
ability to understand the intracacies of these arguments. and even if
they did, to debate these arguments from a scientific standpoint would
in their eyes confer legitimacy.

to allow the ravings and histrionics of drittemann and others to go
unanswered, to not launch equally vicious "smears" on them, is to allow
kathleen and others to be run over. I for one am not going to stand by
helplessly while drittemann insults me and others who have suffered
terribly from this disease, and lies and mischaracterizes in response
to well-reasoned arguments. are you even aware of this tendency of his?
to distort? perhaps you don't agree with kathleen. and that's fine. but
if you act politely and others do not, you will lose. do polite
candidates win office? yes, it would be nice if they did, but candidate
cookies and tea rarely will win. and to draw an anology from another
topic recently discussed, being war, well what happened when the nazis
invaded polite little denmark?

we didn't win the cold war through shipments of christmas chocolates to
the soviets. we won the cold war by building 10,000 nuclear warheads
and spending so much money on defense that the USSR couldn't keep up.

jesus was crucified.

and this is a war. anyone who has experienced the depradations of
neuroborreliosis understands this, understands the depth of the
deception campaign, the incredible lies and corruption being spit out
by the NIH and CDC as well as IDSA. have you read what walter stamms
has been sending out lately?

I have yet to see one single individual post here and convincingly,
politely, and logically refute the arguments of kathleen or others from
a scientific perspective.

you may feel that kathleen is hogging the newsgroup. yes, she should
stop the off-topic posting. then again, there are others who "overpost"
new topics...how should we decide who has a "right" to post, and who
does not? once again, it is all very subjective.

derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com

2005-10-26, 11:18 am

mockingbird wrote:

> I'm not excusing my own rudeness and insensitivity, phyllis.

LOL.
>
> I'm not even referring to such language as rudeness or insensitivity.
>
> there is a fundamental difference between using perjorative language
> against someone (or someones) who cannot restrain themselves from
> launching repeated and vicious ad hominem attacks on individuals who
> are afflicted with an organic brain disease, and someone who treats
> others with respect.

Perhaps people with "ORGANIC BRAIN DISEASE"...people whose judgment is
affected...should NOT be on the internet 24/7 365 days a year
expounding on all kinds of subjects they don't understand and BADLY
misleading others and creating a climate of HATE, PARANOIA and
suspicion.

Given that obsession...what would you recommend, sweetie? Just remain
silent and allow all this insanity to go unanswered so that "newbies"
who see it think it is the gospel truth?

Look at the record. Kathleen and Lisa KNOWINGLY attack other Lyme
patients who simply disagree with them. They label them as "Steere
Camp" agents so that the weak of mind and spirit will not believe them
when they tell the TRUTH about the two of them. They are irresponsible
self-centered egotists. Nuts. Understand? Nuts is nuts.

Semsible people just leave or remain silent. All that is left are
whackjobs and pudpullers like yourself.
>
> perhaps you feel that drittemann and chuck and others fall into the
> latter category.
>
> what I stated, essentially, was that I was willing to forego the use of
> "unacceptable" and impolite language (completely subjective terms, by
> the way) if others would agree to reciprocate in kind.
>
> as I understand it, the main reason if not the only reason that
> drittemann and chuck post here at all is to ridicule those who espouse
> theories which implicate the "establishment" in scandalous behavior.

LOL. You don't understand. The above demonstarates your immature
thought process in a way you apparently cannot imagine. The world is
much more complex than in your little classrooms.

> Usually, these individuals utilize ad hominem attacks accentuating an
> individuals "insanity" or an individuals difficulties in life (losing
> children, etc.), and often post facetious or misleading responses
> which, in addition to being abusive, when carefully analyzed, are found
> either not in response to a post or deliberately mischaracterize what
> someone else has posted.

Oh...bull. You mean like constantly calling someone a "paid plant of
the Steere Camp". Give me a break.
>
> the reason for this is clear enough to me....when you google a
> lyme-related topic, many of these posts are found in the search
> results. Thus, what happens within the confines of this group, the
> information which is posted, is generally accessible to the internet
> community (unlike lymenet posts, for instance).
>
> this is why these people exist. they cannot let these posts go
> unanswered. it is part of a propaganda campaign. and the most effective
> way to discredit someone is to smear them, paint them as crazy.
> drittemann and chuck and others have demonstrated a general lack of
> ability to understand the intracacies of these arguments. and even if
> they did, to debate these arguments from a scientific standpoint would
> in their eyes confer legitimacy.

LOL. Can't understand the "intricacies" of these arguments? Like
READING the text...where it says "late-stage" sera only? Bad example
following on the heels of this debacle, don't you think?

> to allow the ravings and histrionics of drittemann and others to go
> unanswered, to not launch equally vicious "smears" on them, is to allow
> kathleen and others to be run over.

LMAO. She's a danger to herself and others. Look at what she just did.
She's been screaming "FRAUD" at the top of her lungs for months. And
she doesn't even understand...and apparently didn't even bother to
read...the damn text that she claims is the basis of this thing.

Her understanding of the law is horrid.

I for one am not going to stand by
> helplessly while drittemann insults me and others who have suffered
> terribly from this disease, and lies and mischaracterizes in response
> to well-reasoned arguments.

ROFLMAO. Yeah? You seem to ASSume that the drittemann has not, himself,
"suffered terribly from this disease". WRONG. See, this is a major part
of your problem. YOU SPEND WAY TOO MUCH TIME FEELING SORRY FOR YOURSELF
and looking for someone else to BLAME. (Like the weak-kneed
pink-pantied little candy-assed poof that you are. Sorry, just a
"diagnosis", not intended as an "ad hominem" attack).

are you even aware of this tendency of his?
> to distort? perhaps you don't agree with kathleen. and that's fine. but
> if you act politely and others do not, you will lose. do polite
> candidates win office? yes, it would be nice if they did, but candidate
> cookies and tea rarely will win. and to draw an anology from another
> topic recently discussed, being war, well what happened when the nazis
> invaded polite little denmark?

Better question is about the brownshirts who stood on the street
corners and kept up a steady torrent of LIES against the Jews and other
unpopular figures. See, the REAL lesson in a democracy is defending the
right of unpopular opinions. Kathleen, Lisa...YOU...are DEMAGOGUES of
the worst kind.
>
> we didn't win the cold war through shipments of christmas chocolates to
> the soviets. we won the cold war by building 10,000 nuclear warheads
> and spending so much money on defense that the USSR couldn't keep up.

(Well, what if we had sent them EX-LAX chocolates? Ever think of that
one? You know, like Castro's exploding cigars? My guess...what with the
toilet paper rationing then in place...they would have come to us
begging...)LOL. WHAT???
>
> jesus was crucified.

Well, that's what some say...
>
> and this is a war. anyone who has experienced the depradations of
> neuroborreliosis understands this, understands the depth of the
> deception campaign, the incredible lies and corruption being spit out
> by the NIH and CDC as well as IDSA. have you read what walter stamms
> has been sending out lately?

A "WAR"? Are you SERIOUS? Whoa. "Onward Lymie Soldiers"? Don't you and
your little histrionic playmates think you're taking all of this AND
YOURSELVES a little too seriously? Here's the joke: none of this...what
is being said and done here really matters very much. Don't confuse the
illusion for the reality.
>
> I have yet to see one single individual post here and convincingly,
> politely, and logically refute the arguments of kathleen or others from
> a scientific perspective.

LMAO!!! SHE CAN'T EVEN READ THE DAMN TEXTS!!! WHAT IN THE HELL ARE YOU
TALKING ABOUT?

IT ISN'T AN ISSUE OF "SCIENCE"...it is the LEGAL implications of some
of these allegations. Asserting that people are guilty of "CRIMES" and
"FRAUD" with little or NO evidence to supprt these allegations is JUST
PLAIN WRONG!!! (Bearing FALSE WITNESS for all you Bible-thumpers).
>
> you may feel that kathleen is hogging the newsgroup. yes, she should
> stop the off-topic posting. then again, there are others who "overpost"
> new topics...how should we decide who has a "right" to post, and who
> does not? once again, it is all very subjective.

TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT THIS. (Son, you had better learn NOT to talk this
way to me, or other other MEN face-to-face):

"Mockingbird" wrote:

> weisman = drittemann = chuck = mcfaggot

DDM :"Prove it, moron">>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

there are a number of ways to do this...the first that comes to mind is

proof by contradiction..ie...you DISPROVE it....

the second, and much more obvious way, is a simple series of
identities....

weisman = cocksucker
drittemann = cocksucker
chuck = cocksucker
mcfaggot = cocksucker

therefore, cocksucker = weisman = drittemann = chuck = mcfaggot

q.e.d.

extension: martijn = jackass.
does jackass = cocksucker?
probably. proof later.

Chuck P Adams

2005-10-26, 11:18 am

I am working on cleaning up this group as we speak from the foul
mouthed infusion company trolls.

They lost many years ago and moved into there "Lymenut" fort and feel
safe there. It seem's a few think they can assault this group with off
topic garbage, impostors of regular posters like myself and posting of
outdated lyme misinformation in large Spam numbers.

You are not going to get your pro-fraud views thru here. This is not
going to be a classified newspaper for crooked LLMD's trying to drum up
business to take advantage of the sick and confused.

Chuck always win's!

Get used to it

mockingbird

2005-10-26, 11:18 am

well, this post pretty much answers the question...drittemann is
obviously not willing to move on, it would rather continue to foment an
environment of hatred.

what's really interesting here is drittemann's abandonment of his
recent "I don't care, kid" attitude in response to this post, which was
not even addressed to him.

drittemann, it is as clear as day to me that you don't have a clue what
lyme disease does to a person beyond what you read in an IDSA
publication.

no one believes your lies.

you are unwilling to identify yourself in any form.

I would gladly go to any lyme gathering and tell everyone there who I
was and what my opinions were.

I - a weak kneed pink pantied candy assed poof- and others have offered
to meet you in public.

you are a coward and a liar.

and, as someone who claimed to have attended law school, you were
unaware that 16 was commonly the age of consent. "where in the hell is
16 the age of consent?"...everyone saw this gaffe. what's funny is I
believe it happened in the middle of a conversation with another fake.

your understanding of the law is horrid.

probably kathleen and others would be best served by ignoring your
garbage, or by all agreeing to post the same response to you whenever
you post, outlining your lies and motives, detailing your cowardice and
vicious personal agenda.

if none of this really matters, then why do you bother in the first
place, drittemann?

you mentioned, amongst your many other illogical statements, that
people with organic brain disease should not be on the internet
espousing opinions; their judgment is affected. having a brain disease
does not imply that one's judgement is disabled. and, by the way, you
have mentioned that you have experienced neuropsychological problems.
so are you therefore suggesting that you yourself should not be on the
internet espousing your opinions?

I have never met an individual with lyme disease who shared your
opinions, drittemann. if you really want to make an impact, you should
abandon the shelter of the internet, and get out there and attend
meetings and share your story and beliefs with others.

you would be much more credible.

and...as far as the war goes...if you think none of these opinions
matter, then why is it than allen steere has steadfastly refused to
speak to the press for the past three years....wouldn't even grant an
interview to a fellow harvard professor writing a book about lyme
disease...and if these opinions don't matter, then what happened to
Lymerix? Poor market or vaccine fraud, it got pulled because patients
didn't want it.

anyone who has truly experienced this disease, the difficulty in
obtaining diagnosis, and then the difficulty in obtaining
treatment....understands that this is a war. a war caused by anthony
fauci, mind you...he wanted a vaccine, and it blew up in his face.
note, even with AIDS fauci and NIH had no problems with patient reps on
aids policy boards...but with lyme, they are now (IDSA) actively
lobbying against ANY patient reps...why?

for the same reason steere won't openly discuss his views.

because these individuals are not scientists, they are propagandists
(like you).

their goal is not to uncover the truth.

it is the reverse.

dali

2005-10-26, 11:18 am

>and, as someone who claimed to have attended law school, you were
>unaware that 16 was commonly the age of consent. "where in the hell is
>16 the age of consent?"...everyone saw this gaffe.

did you see his post in which he did not provide me with an email due
to the fact that he did not receive permission from the sender, YET he
felt it was OK to post the private email everywhere on usenet/internet
also without her permission. I'm not a legal expert but....

derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com

2005-10-26, 11:18 am

dali wrote:
>
> did you see his post in which he did not provide me with an email due
> to the fact that he did not receive permission from the sender, YET he
> felt it was OK to post the private email everywhere on usenet/internet
> also without her permission. I'm not a legal expert but....

Yes, Brent.

You are NOT a legal expert.

Did you see the post where Brent LIED about asking derdrittemann to
contact her?

Did you see the post where Brent LIED about posting his personal
information on the internet?

Did you see the post where Brent LIED about the UNI situation, yet
refused to contact her himself?

Gee, I think Brent is a LIAR.

And if Brent LIES about little things like this...then WHY should we
trust him when he says he derives no profit from his relentless
silver-spam n scam.

derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com

2005-10-26, 11:18 am

mockingbird wrote:

> well, this post pretty much answers the question...drittemann is
> obviously not willing to move on, it would rather continue to foment an
> environment of hatred.

Yeah...that is RIGHT. YOU owe me and everryone here an APOLOGY for your
foul assaults. Until you do...no way.

> I would gladly go to any lyme gathering and tell everyone there who I
> was and what my opinions were.

Excellent.
>
> I - a weak kneed pink pantied candy assed poof- and others have offered
> to meet you in public.

Excellent.

mockingbird

2005-10-26, 11:18 am

hmmm........

if I were to apologize to you and chuck for my "foul assaults" would
you also apologize to kathleen and lisa (and me) among others for your
own "foul assaults"?

dali

2005-10-26, 11:18 am

derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com wrote:
> dali wrote:
>
> Yes, Brent.
>
> You are NOT a legal expert.

So then it is legal to post PRIVATE email all over the internet.
Thanks for clearing that up.

>
> Did you see the post where Brent LIED about asking derdrittemann to
> contact her?
>
> Did you see the post where Brent LIED about posting his personal
> information on the internet?
>
> Did you see the post where Brent LIED about the UNI situation, yet
> refused to contact her himself?
>
> Gee, I think Brent is a LIAR.

YAWN, what a weak and pathetic case you got there "lawyer"

>
> And if Brent LIES about little things like this...then WHY should we
> trust him when he says he derives no profit from his relentless
> silver-spam n scam.

I suppose you believe the recent article from the journal of
nanotechnology is spam? the HUNDREDS of pubmed articles claiming the
virtues of silver from reputable DOCTORS are simply scams to make a few
bucks?

???AND WE ARE THE CONSPIRACY NUTS?

mockingbird

2005-10-26, 11:18 am

well, this post pretty much answers the question...drittemann is
obviously not willing to move on, it would rather continue to foment an

environment of hatred.

what's really interesting here is drittemann's abandonment of his
recent "I don't care, kid" attitude in response to this post, which was

not even addressed to him.

drittemann, it is as clear as day to me that you don't have a clue what

lyme disease does to a person beyond what you read in an IDSA
publication.

no one believes your lies.

you are unwilling to identify yourself in any form.

I would gladly go to any lyme gathering and tell everyone there who I
was and what my opinions were.

I - a weak kneed pink pantied candy assed poof- and others have offered

to meet you in public.

you are a coward and a liar.

and, as someone who claimed to have attended law school, you were
unaware that 16 was commonly the age of consent. "where in the hell is
16 the age of consent?"...everyone saw this gaffe. what's funny is I
believe it happened in the middle of a conversation with another fake.

your understanding of the law is horrid.

probably kathleen and others would be best served by ignoring your
garbage, or by all agreeing to post the same response to you whenever
you post, outlining your lies and motives, detailing your cowardice and

vicious personal agenda.

if none of this really matters, then why do you bother in the first
place, drittemann?

you mentioned, amongst your many other illogical statements, that
people with organic brain disease should not be on the internet
espousing opinions; their judgment is affected. having a brain disease
does not imply that one's judgement is disabled. and, by the way, you
have mentioned that you have experienced neuropsychological problems.
so are you therefore suggesting that you yourself should not be on the
internet espousing your opinions?

I have never met an individual with lyme disease who shared your
opinions, drittemann. if you really want to make an impact, you should
abandon the shelter of the internet, and get out there and attend
meetings and share your story and beliefs with others.

you would be much more credible.

and...as far as the war goes...if you think none of these opinions
matter, then why is it than allen steere has steadfastly refused to
speak to the press for the past three years....wouldn't even grant an
interview to a fellow harvard professor writing a book about lyme
disease...and if these opinions don't matter, then what happened to
Lymerix? Poor market or vaccine fraud, it got pulled because patients
didn't want it.

anyone who has truly experienced this disease, the difficulty in
obtaining diagnosis, and then the difficulty in obtaining
treatment....understands that this is a war. a war caused by anthony
fauci, mind you...he wanted a vaccine, and it blew up in his face.
note, even with AIDS fauci and NIH had no problems with patient reps on

aids policy boards...but with lyme, they are now (IDSA) actively
lobbying against ANY patient reps...why?

for the same reason steere won't openly discuss his views.

because these individuals are not scientists, they are propagandists
(like you).

their goal is not to uncover the truth.

it is the reverse.

derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com

2005-10-26, 11:18 am

dali wrote:

> ???AND WE ARE THE CONSPIRACY NUTS?

Yeah...and just plain NUTS.

Brent, you stupid, STUPID moron...if you had any doubts about that
e-mail...WHY didn't you just conatct her and ask her yourself?

THAT is what you said you were going to do.

It isn't a LEGAL issue, numbnuts...simply etiquette. Courtesy. She was
kind enough to respond...and I didn't have her permission...so I didn't
use her name. My assumption, however, was she knew I intended to post
the reply as I told her WHY I was asking.

YOU knew who the author was.

If you wanted to verify it...why didn't you ask her?

Simple: you knew it was true.

Get real, for godssakes. Gawd, you're dense.

derdrittemann2...@yahoo.com

2005-10-26, 11:18 am

hey drittemann, why did you remove the post???

dali

2005-10-26, 11:18 am

On 24 Oct 2005 12:27:26 -0700, derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com stated:

>
>dali wrote:
>
>
>
>Yeah...and just plain NUTS.
>
>Brent, you stupid, STUPID moron...if you had any doubts about that
>e-mail...WHY didn't you just conatct her and ask her yourself?
>
>THAT is what you said you were going to do.
>
>It isn't a LEGAL issue, numbnuts...simply etiquette. Courtesy. She was
>kind enough to respond...and I didn't have her permission...so I didn't
>use her name. My assumption, however, was she knew I intended to post
>the reply as I told her WHY I was asking.
>
>YOU knew who the author was.
>
>If you wanted to verify it...why didn't you ask her?
>
>Simple: you knew it was true.
>
>Get real, for godssakes. Gawd, you're dense.

LAME

derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com

2005-10-26, 11:18 am

dali wrote:

> LAME

Extremely intelligent response, Brent...but hardly responsive, there,
girlfriend.

WHY didn't YOU contact the good professor, Brent, darling...if you
didn't believe me?

LOL.

dali

2005-10-26, 11:18 am

On 24 Oct 2005 18:25:07 -0700, derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com stated:

>
>dali wrote:
>
>
>
>Extremely intelligent response, Brent...but hardly responsive, there,
>girlfriend.
>
>WHY didn't YOU contact the good professor, Brent, darling...if you
>didn't believe me?
>
>LOL.

I REALY REALY REALY don't give a XXXX. whole thing LAME.

derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com

2005-10-26, 11:18 am

dali wrote:
> On 24 Oct 2005 12:03:48 -0700, "dali" <borgersbrent@yahoo.com>
> stated:

> I've never SCAMMED anyone and I don't like you implying it.

Colloidal silver IS a scam, you dipshit...and I'm not "implying"
it...I'm saying it.

dali

2005-10-26, 11:18 am

derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com wrote:
> dali wrote:
>
>
>
> Colloidal silver IS a scam, you dipshit...and I'm not "implying"
> it...I'm saying it.

Well the whole world is in on it. Except for a few whores PAID to say
otherwise.

Chuck P Adams

2005-10-26, 11:18 am

SILVER = FRAUD. That is never going to change.

Martijn

2005-10-26, 11:19 am

pmerv@direcway.com wrote:
> we could start more civilized discourse here if
> 1. people would agree to call others only the names they have chosen
> for themselves or a neutral abbreviation
> 2. people would address the ISSUES ONLY and not substitute personal
> attacks for real evidence or arguments on an issue.
> I will pray for that.

Your preaching and praying worked wonders.. *roll eyes*

No, in fact it worked the other way around. You were feeding the trolls,
by letting them know you care about the crap they post.

Just do what I say, concentrate on Lyme and post about Lyme. Ignore the
nonsense if you don't like it. Don't give it attention!

Amen to that.

pmerv@direcway.com

2005-10-26, 11:19 am

Amen to that and I'm done with preaching and praying!

quaalude

2005-10-26, 11:19 am

Amen to Martijn the troll!

quaalude

2005-10-27, 6:17 pm

Martijn,
It would be a shame to see you go. Especially so because you would be
missing out on an incredible group
of warm and caring people who are
selflessly willing to share their
extensive amount of knowledge with
you and help you through anything
that you may face while dealing with
this disease.

I'm so very grateful for Lymenet and
all of the incredible people that I've
'met' here. Without them, I would never
have been the "horse led to water" that
I am, and my daughter would probably be
suffering horribly and needlessly right
now. Instead, she is well on the road
to recovery.

I owe her improving health to many people,
but most of all to the members here on
Lymenet whom I will be grateful to for the
rest of my life.

How sad to see you miss out on everything
this board and its people have to offer you
because of the way the administrators must
maintain the database.

I hope you'll stay, but if you don't I'm
sure that I can speak for all of us here
in wishing you the best of luck with your
future.

Take good care of yourself.

(I put a lot of line breaks in this message
so I hope it shows up in a readable fashion)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

this is how martijn was treated by individuals who really have lyme
disease on lyme net.....

quaalude

2005-10-27, 6:17 pm

Once a lymeNUT, always a lymeNUT? Apparently it's a tough NUT to crack.

[vbcol=seagreen]
?>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

/..................................

and this is martijn's attitude...
anyone who believes that martijn has a borelliosis, or is cut from any
other than the same hideous cloth that spawned drittemann or chuck P
adams, etc. is being naive.

Martijn

2005-10-27, 6:17 pm

quaalude wrote:

> and this is martijn's attitude...
> anyone who believes that martijn has a borelliosis, or is cut from any
> other than the same hideous cloth that spawned drittemann or chuck P
> adams, etc. is being naive.

LOL

Don't forget to take your anti-paranoia pills.

Have a nice day, ghost buster!

Martijn

2005-10-27, 6:17 pm

quaalude wrote:

> this is how martijn was treated by individuals who really have lyme
> disease on lyme net.....

By this one individual.

dali

2005-10-27, 6:17 pm

Martijn motives are usually that of a sockpuppet but sometimes he
surprises me.

derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com

2005-10-27, 6:17 pm

dali wrote:

> Martijn motives are usually that of a sockpuppet but sometimes he
> surprises me.

Yes, but the word "aspersion" surprises you, Brent.

derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com

2005-10-27, 6:17 pm

dali wrote:

> "Martijn motives are usually that of a sockpuppet but sometimes he
> surprises me".

Look, Brent...Martijn's ONLY problem is that he has remained cheerful
and has been polite and courteous to just about everyone.

See, while trying to reamain above the fray may seem like a good thing
to do...it just wasn't good enough for some.

And by that, I mean...LISA.

You see, Lisa was obsessed with "A. Weisman". And Lisa didn't like
ANYONE being friendly with "A. Weisman".

(Just go to the search engine here...type in the words "friendly"
"Weisman"...and you will notice her chastising and questioning more
than a few people who dared to speak to him).

It's a control freak fascist mind control technique. They just hit you
with the Steere Camp or "troll" thing...and you are ostracized.

Why?

Simple. Because you bothered to disagree with them.

Weak-kneed little petunias like you and Brucie cave right in.

Here, have a look...here she is working on
"Melvin/Bruce/Eugeneshapiroisapig/FilthyMcNasty/Quaalude:

Lymerayja
Frequent Contributor

Posts: 143
From: UK
Registered: Jan 2005
posted 11 April 2005 14:15

BTW Bruce, if I can put this politely, you seem to be a
little...hmmmm..eccentric these days. Is something up with you?

When I first read your posts I really liked them, not just the funny
stuff but also the serious stuff. And you did seem to grasp that the
Steere camp were guilty of deliberate fraud (as you do in this post).

But I have noticed that lately you have started to become kinda
friendly
with weisman (Chief Skunk of Sci Med). What's going on? Surely you know

he is a Steere camp provocateur?

If you don't, I suggest you do a search for his name + ILADS or
"weisman" + "burrascano" or even "weisman" + "LymeNet" and see the kind

of crap that comes up. He is forever expressing his hatred for ILADS
and
making fun of our good doctors, as well as showing his hatred of all
Lymeland.

It is true he does pretend to be a Lymie at times, and says things
apparently against the Steere camp, especially when new people pop into

the sci-med group.

But if you read closely, there is always a a sub-text, a punchline at
the end. It's things like "well, we all know the testing sucks, but
........." or "I don't like Steere, but...." and what follows the "but"
comes straight out of a bull's butt, basically.

I thought you were an intelligent guy, and could see through that
stuff?

Sorry to crab. But you're not the first Lymie to get drawn into his
snake-pit. He hypnotised that fool Martijn, and manipulated a mentally
ill woman with Lyme into going around hurling abuse at LLMDs, and
repeating everything he said.

I'm not suggesting you are going to start bad-mouthing ILADS and
calling
LymeNet "LymeNut" just because he does. I just don't understand why you

are giving him the time of day?

I truly hope you're not thinking of smoking the genetically-modified
peace pipe with weisman?

Lisa

ROFLMAO.

Guess little Brucie got his "mind right".

Whipped into shape by a twisted psychotic XXXXX like Lisa.

Whatta man.

quaalude

2005-10-27, 6:18 pm

LMFAO...

are you really that clueless, drittemann?

dali

2005-10-27, 6:18 pm

On 26 Oct 2005 11:07:01 -0700, derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com stated:

>
>Look, Brent...Martijn's ONLY problem is that he has remained cheerful
>and has been polite and courteous to just about everyone.
>
>See, while trying to reamain above the fray may seem like a good thing
>to do...it just wasn't good enough for some.

and he got BOOTED out of Lyemnut why? Generaly speaking, calling a
bunch of people who are trying to survive one of the most hideous
diseases around NUTS is not SANE. So once again I come up with
"characters" on usenet in which I must make a decision. Is this person
Sane or is he/she paid to blog on usenet.
Now the intelligence factor is another thing to consider. Thus the
trickyness of Martjin and others.

derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com

2005-10-27, 6:18 pm

dali wrote:
>
> and he got BOOTED out of Lyemnut why?

ROFLMAO. Don't ask ME!!! I watched from a safe distance...don't ask me
to explain what those pinheads do, and I'm certainly not dumb enough to
join in their little clique of "trollhunters".

Don't you understand YET that this "TROLL" thing is just how some mean
little candyassed tyrants maintain their pathetic little corner of the
internet?

Seems unbelievable that anyone would be so trivial and petty...but it
is apparently true.

Who CARES if someone...(God forbid)...from the medical community
actually contributes here or there? WHY would that bother anyone? What?
Don't want to talk to someone who may actually know what they are
talking about?

LOOK...NO ONE is getting PAID to be a part of THIS STUPIDITY. IT ISN'T
WORTH IT. UNDERSTAND? NO. GET A LIFE AND A CLUE.

Are you REALLY so stupid that you don't realize that this is how little
fascist hate-mongers like Lisa maintain their hold on clueless idiots
like yourself?

The fact that you spit this "paid" garbage back out just shows what an
intellectually weak little petunia you are compared to LISA...for
godssakes.

It looked to me like people were being removed from there based on
nothing that they had done there...but probably on the basis of who
they spoke with here.

By that, I mean the little "girlfriends" network e-mailed him and
others behind their backs. Vicious little snakes that they actually
are. You should be proud to be assoicated with these totally useless
people.

So once again I come up with
> "characters" on usenet in which I must make a decision. Is this person
> Sane or is he/she paid to blog on usenet.
> Now the intelligence factor is another thing to consider. Thus the
> trickyness of Martjin and others.

Gosh, Brent...with the totally, totally awesome display of logic
there...

....one can only wonder how you manage to get dressed in the morning.

Chuck P Adams

2005-10-27, 6:18 pm

Janis, Martijn has been here alot longer than you have dear, and even
though I don't agree with what he writes he is 100% better than your
foul mouth hole.

Maybe you should go hide again and leave us alone.

Chuck P Adams

2005-10-27, 6:18 pm

Daili,brent or Hick, what ever your calling yourself today, your only
motive here is to push that silver crap onto the group.

quaalude

2005-10-27, 6:18 pm

hey chuck, why don't you tell us all about your struggles with lyme
disease.
oh yeah.
I forgot.
YOU DON'T HAVE LYME DISEASE. AND NEVER DID.

Chuck P Adams

2005-10-27, 6:18 pm

LOL, I have had lyme more times than most people that post here honey.

quaalude

2005-10-27, 6:18 pm

no one believes that.

what everyone does believe is that you are a very sick human being.

and, on top of that, a moron who thinks my name is Janis.