Lasik Eyes Surgery - Ragnar's amusing behavior

Author

Ragnar's amusing behavior

Brent Hanson - LASIKFRAUD.COM

2004-10-10, 7:10 pm

Christopher Roiland aka "Ragnar Suomi" alleges that:

"Now let's see... Brent has a 5 year history of insanity, lying, deceiving,
manipulating, spying and stalking. You can bet that someone is going to
believe him about this message. He must have been up all night cooking this
one up."

But he admits sending my an e-mail, claims I "cooked" up the e-mail, and
alleges that he sent the e-mail to someone who is insane, lying, deceiving,
manipulating, spying and stalking.

What kind of person would do such a thing?

"Ragnar Suomi" <ragnarsuomi@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:52tfm0h3ub62nddd2uebhnk28kl8q2jlcm@4ax.com...
About half of that message is what I sent to Mr. Whacko trying to get
him to redirect his insanity. So much for that attempt.
The other half of "my" message is words added, changed, and deleted to
spice it up. Your version is much more exciting than mine is. I
bet you got an "A" in creative writing.

Now let's see... Brent has a 5 year history of insanity, lying,
deceiving, manipulating, spying and stalking. You can bet that
someone is going to believe him about this message.

He must have been up all night cooking this one up.

On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 01:03:12 -0700, "Brent Hanson - LASIKFRAUD.COM"
<brent@nospam_lasikfraud.com> wrote:

>I received the following e-mail from Ragnar, whom I consider to be a vulgar
>person who lacks any ethics.
>
>It's a mystery to me why he thinks I am his "buddy".
>
>========================================================
>
>I think you are getting better at directing your attacks rather than just
>blasting away with a shotgun approach. You and Sandy need to blame the
>doctors and facilities, not LASIK. In Sandy's case, she stupidly went to
>court and started attacking the LASIK procedure. The procedure is fine,
>it's the idiot doctors and shysters that cause the problems. I'm not up on
>the early history of LASIK, but I think it was TLC that invented the
corrupt
>practices regarding using LASIK as a cash cow.
>
>Dr. Gemoules makes me sick. What a hippocrite. LASIK is great when it's
>paying his bills. What he does with contact lenses is quackery. NO OTHER
>optometrist screws around with the wild contact lens treatments he does.
>Did you see his comment where he takes an average of 46 months to fit a
>patient with contacts? That would be laughable if it weren't so
sickening.
>It would be senseless to sue an OD though. They don't make enough money to
>be bothered suing.
>
>Have at them all you want. Pick on TLC too.. just try to seperate the
>procedure from the people who misuse it.
>One thing that I don't get and you might want to mention is that why on
>earth would Tiger Woods go to TLC for his surgery? Probably because they
>are a company large enough to pay him for an endorsement. In his case,
>the problem isn't the results of his LASIK, the problem is his ethics in
>being a paid endorser of the procedure. People will do anything for money.
>It should be illegal for someone to be paid money for endorsing something.
>If they want to endorse it, fine - but when they accept money for it, the
>endorsement value is meaningless.
>
>Here's something else that really bothers me. Just yesterday, Glenn came
>out with the remark that "I (Glenn) have never recommended LASIK to
>anyone". What??? That would be news to all those surgeons that he
>collects thousands of dollars from every year for his referral services.
>Curiously, that one group of doctors with a website of Dr. Marzchat
>(misspelled) and some other Doctor also employs Dr. Rothman - who is one of
>the most infamous high volume quacks going. The problem I have with that
>website and that organization which is made up of about 5 centers in the
>West is that ONE of the doctors is CRSQA certified, yet the website implys
>that all the doctors and the facilities are CRSQA certified. That is
highly
>fraudulent. Even though I KNOW that only one of those doctors is CRSQA
>certified, I'm not exactly sure which one it is nor could I find anything
on
>that website to indicate that only one of them is certified. Glenn has in
>effect given his endorsement to all those doctors and facilities.
>
> I would suggest that you continue to think about what you post and how it
>will be used and interpreted before you hit that enter key.
>
>In short, I think it would be good if you took the fundamental position of
>LASIK is great.. but not when you go to a high volume LASIK mill or get
>stuck with a doctor who is a liar and/or hippocrite and/or just plain
crazy.
>Minarik is clearly crazy. Gemoules is a hippocrite. I'm not sure what to
>think of Glenn lately. He seems to be the apologist for everyone. There
is
>no right or wrong in his book.
>__________________________________________________
>

2004-10-10, 10:08 pm

"Cooked Up" means you altered the message.

On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 11:47:23 -0700, "Brent Hanson - LASIKFRAUD.COM"
<brent@nospam_lasikfraud.com> wrote:

>Christopher Roiland aka "Ragnar Suomi" alleges that:
>
>"Now let's see... Brent has a 5 year history of insanity, lying, deceiving,
>manipulating, spying and stalking. You can bet that someone is going to
>believe him about this message. He must have been up all night cooking this
>one up."
>
>But he admits sending my an e-mail, claims I "cooked" up the e-mail, and
>alleges that he sent the e-mail to someone who is insane, lying, deceiving,
>manipulating, spying and stalking.
>
>What kind of person would do such a thing?
>