From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 08:53:40 -0600 Archived: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 12:36:36 -0500 Subject: Re: Woods/Jacobs - A Salient But Missing Point >From: Gene Steinberg <gene.nul> >To: post.nul >Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 07:49:03 -0700 >Subject: Re: Woods/Jacobs - A Salient But Missing Point >>From: Alfred Lehmberg <alienview.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <post.nul> >>Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 14:15:42 -0600 >>Subject: Re: Woods/Jacobs - A Salient But Missing Point ><snip> >This is the last time I will respond. Oft' times a scrofulous refuge similar to the one aforementioned, eh? >You aren't worth the time, >and you have nothing valid to contribute to this discussion nor, >it seems, to any discussion that involves adults talking to each >other using logic and reason. I'm sure you _must_ mean valid points you were loath to qualify, substantiate, or justify, outlined in all logic and reason, plus something else you seem to lack: empathy, conscience and compassion. All these aforementioned points contribute balance to a discussion, Mr. Steinberg, for which you would appear to provide all _im_balance. >For those of you who are exhausted from coping with Lehmberg's >verbal morass to find a semblance of fact within the mud- >slinging, this is where I stand on this situation: Right... before we continue this excruciating dissection of bald inconstancy, incredible malfeasance, gross infidelity, and rank sociopathy, I'd like to point out that, verbal morass or not, I aspire, muse imbued, to write as completely, as clearly, and as imaginatively as I can. I suspect I'm only too clear in the long run when the reading's _really_ done, eh? To business then: >1. 'Emma Woods' is a deceiver. Way to cut right to the chase, Mr. Steinberg! Though, not a _word_ or a _speck_ of opprobrium... shred of criticism or censure... that "balance" you'd pretend to have for the _provenance_ of the alleged deception, the deception catalogued, tabbed & indexed, hot-linked, and that which you _studiously_ ignore? Who deceived whom, _first_, Sir, and who has provided for no deception, actually, at all? I submit that _you_ are more deceiver, Mr Steinfeld. >She posted messages supporting >herself in our forums (and elsewhere I understand) under a fake >name, other than the fake name she is already using. Self-soiling laughter, Mr. Steinberg. Let me get this straight. Was this woman remarked upon not the very same woman _prohibited_ from providing for her own defense on your mystery- metal standard board... against inaccurate, humiliating, and Jacobs boosting slanders? Yeah, even _if_ sock-puppeting, I suppose that one might feel compelled to look for another way 'in' to defend a character, honor, and personal reputation against libelous in-the-tank nose-bubblers and Jacobs fan-boys. A reasonable person would forgive this lead-off concern with which you open, Mr. Steinberg. I'm less than surprised that _you_ are unforgiving. Your cant precludes compassion, I expect, even sense. >Wearing the >mask of anonymity, she has turned herself into a celebrity of >sorts as the alleged abused victim, with a Web site, thousands >of e-mails, message board posts, magazine articles, and radio >appearances. Oh, you _must_ mean "blew the whistle," _finally_ heard, on un- professionalism so bald and suppurating that the flesh crawls, Mr. Steinberg. A "whistle" well couched, supported and documented, about which scholarly papers have been written, other papers inspired, and has impressed the publishers and editors of magazines, Print, Pod, and Pad in her plight and valiant struggle with same. 'Wearing the mask of anonymity', Sir, are Steinberg nurtured Woods hating trolls and pundits participating in the _truly_ pathological, eh? >Before that happened the woman who calls herself 'Emma Woods' >didn't exist in the world at large. Then? Then she was outraged that an un-principled man had his salacious way with her and seriously compromised her mental health. She spoke out in her own defense, to the horror, chagrin, and outrage of her busy detractors, producing a bona fide "rape kit" she'd compiled as good as DNA evidence. Oooooo... now all of a sudden we have a _real_ issue, eh? >None of this means that she >wasn't somehow mistreated by someone who lives thousands of >miles away, someone she's never met, and only communicated with >by phone, email, or Internet chats. That's just loss-leader stuff provided to appear reasonable when you are not, Mr. Steinberg. See, your own behavior on your own board, coupled with the behavior you nurture and facilitate in others, speaks volumes where your every _utterance_ addresses the mental health and general infidelity of Emma Woods while there is not a corresponding commentary on Good Dr. Jacobs and his, IMO, utter malfeasance, at all. You thought all that would go un-noticed? >As I said, she appears smart >enough to know that you can end a conversation by hanging up the >phone, and you can stop communicating in writing by not putting >her fingers on the keyboard,or holding a pen or pencil in your >hand. Which is exactly what you would expect your wife or daughter to do after they'd been psychologically rogered, intellectually tortured, roundly humiliated, and then infected with a life threatening mental disease. No, Mr. Steinberg, I submit your vulpine litigious fangs would appear for Dr. Jacobs, then. >Was she somehow mentally abused by Jacobs? Somehow? When it's all there for the world to hear? How _could_ there be any question. How telling that you could even _ask_ that question. >That's for mental >health professionals or the courts to determine, and so far, the >authorities she's contacted have given her complaints a huge >thumbs down. Not accurate at all in the first place and remaining to be seen, in the second Mr. Steinberg. All the 'authorities' have been reluctant to kick the lid off this can of worms. A bit of the "too big to fail" as it pertains to Temple. See, they have yet to be _properly_ 'encouraged' to do the right thing, eh? Discussion such as you and I have been having here go a long way to encouraging that dialogue. And how's that for irony? Your sullen intransigence, unbalanced commentary, and canted reportage provide for just the attention to Woods that you have, yourself, prohibited, and _would_ prohibit everywhere else. >2. I do not support the conclusions expressed by Jacobs about >alien hybrids. As I wrote elsewhere, I am not persuaded by the >value of hypnotic regression to recover lost memories of >possible missing time events (though I suppose it's useful as an >instigative tool with proper controls), and I certainly worry >about attempting to hypnotize someone by phone, since you cannot >observe physical reactions. This is just more oratorical loss-leader, Mr. Steinberg, an empty appeal to the cowl of logic and reason signifying nothing. Immaterial, too little too late, and irrelevant. Otherwise plain, Sir, is your unqualified support, and by that I mean your support lacks qualification, of a person caught so far in the wrong that belief is buffeted and beggared. Also plain is your hostility and ill will to Emma Woods, a person whose only crime was to expect professional behavior from a lettered professional under the protecting overhang of a major University's letterhead. >I also feel that Jacobs should have >avoided the 'Woods' issue altogether, and I have concerns about >the therapist in New Zealand who suggested in the first place >that she seek help from laymen abduction researchers in the U.S. All completely immaterial to a woman under crippling pressure who reaches out to professionals for help. And. Is. Betrayed. Eh, Mr. Steinberg? >Now can we actually get back to UFO research for a change >rather than this maddening soap opera? That would certainly accommodate only the guilty while it punished the innocent, eh, Mr. Steinberg? Why are you OK with that? >Peace, Really?! Really, Mr. Steinberg? No peace without honor, Sir. I know what that is even where others do not. alienview.nul www.AlienView.net AVG Blog -- http://alienviewgroup.blogspot.com/ U F O M a g a z i n e -- www.ufomag.com Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp