On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 1:45:59 +0000, W.Dockery wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 0:18:41 +0000, HarryLime wrote:
>
On Mon, 10 Feb 2025 22:34:38 +0000, Wilk Dockery wrote:
>
On Mon, 10 Feb 2025 4:49:11 +0000, HarryLime wrote:
>
On Sun, 9 Feb 2025 5:47:00 +0000, Will Dockery wrote:
>
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 13:06:00 +0000, George J. Dance wrote:
>
Since MMP is trying to disrupt his psychoanalysis by attempting to
change the subject to whatever he can think of, and since I don't want
to let his attempts pass without comment, I'm being forced to open new
threads on some of it.
From: https://www.novabbs.com/arts/post.php?id=255645
>
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 12:42:11 +0000, Michael Monkey Peabrain (MPP) aka
"HarryLime" wrote:
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 5:55:00 +0000, George J. Dance wrote:
It seems that Senetto took the lead in attempting to drive Stephan
Pickering from the newsgroup though, but that may have been fueled by
Senetto's obvious Antisemitism.
>
Thanks for reminding me. It was actually MMP who did that by bringing
NAMBLA to the group. That triggered Jim, just the way MFH triggered him
after he was told that it was really about child molesting.
>
Why do you lie so much, George?
>
Why do you project so much, MMP? (That's a rhetorical question. As noted
in
your psychoanalysis, you are playing the preemption game you learned
from
Peter J. Ross.)
>
(That's a rhetorical question, as you've already intimated that your
pathological lying stems from you having been abused as a child.)
>
No, Lying Michael: I have never said, or even "intimated" (!) that I was
pathological, lying, or
"abused as a child".
>
As usual, Michael Pendragon Jud makes his lies and misrepresentations up
as he goes along.
>
I don't know why you're always repeating this line, Donkey... but if
you're attempting to compare me to Indiana Jones, I am delighted to
accept the compliment.
>
>
When Pickles joined the group, he simply posted ongoing entries in a
proposed bibliography of some Magnum Opus he had been working on for
years. To the best of my recollection, this tome-in-progress was an
attempt to tie all of literature, culture, and history together via
Jewish themes explored in Bob Dylan songs.
>
That's actually how I met Stephan Pickering, I bought one of his early
books exploring the connections between the Kabbalah and Bob Dylan
songs.
>
This led to many years of correspondence, which my brother David later
continued via snail mail.
>
Finding connections between Kabbalah and a Jewish man's song lyrics
seems about as difficult of finding Christian connections in the poems
of a Catholic.
>
I doubt that you've actually read Joseph Campbell, but you may have
watched one or more of his Power of Myth episodes on PBS. If so, you
might have some primitive understanding of the interrelatedness of myths
from various cultures and eras, and maybe... just maybe... realize that
these myths (or archetypes) are often expressed through works of art.
>
That BD would employ Kabbalistic themes is practically a given.
>
Stephan Pickering's magnum opus in which he attempts to relate all of
the
material universe (right down to fractals) to BD songs
>
It definitely sounded interesting, too bad it's probably lost now.
>
>
Pick's magnum opus never got beyond the bibliography stage. Pick was
just copy-pasting quotes that in some way reminded him of BD lyrics.
>
He never actually *wrote* anything about them.
>
You're wrong.
>
I've read a couple of Stephan Pickering's books on Bob Dylan, really in
depth work.
>
In fact this is how I met Stephan Pickering back in 1974, when I
ordered one of his books from an ad on Creem Magazine, which also
started our correspondence of many years m
>
Anyone who engages in deep scholarship on a subject can appear to have
"gone off the deep end" to someone who knows nothing of the subject.
>
As Michael Pendragon demonstrates below.
>
On Bob Dyaln? I know enough to cover my ears whenever one of his
records comes on.
>
I remember that.
>
😏
>
Exactly.
>
Stephan Pickering definitely knew his subject matter.
>
his theory which elevated BD to the
position of YHWH, or God.
>
That isn't really what happened.
>
Since he never got around to actually stating what his theory was
>
Going back to the first book Pickering sent me, he was connecting Bob
Dylan songs to the Kabbalah.
A writer's works usually contain elements of the religion he was brought
up in. My poetry and fiction contains many Biblical references,
allusions and symbolism because I was brought up in the Methodist faith.
Many of my older works are, in part, a rebellion against the tenets of
that faith. So it's to be expected that Bob Dylan's lyrics would tie in
with the religion in which he was raised.
Further, comparative religion teaches that there are similarities
running through all religions. The more we strip the religion of its
dogmatism, the more those similarities become apparent. Basically, all
religions have a basis in Mysticism, and all Mysticism is pretty much
the same (they just have different names for God). Kabbalah is similar
to Hinduism in many ways, and Hinduism is similar to Zen Buddhism, and
so on.
So, one can find similarities to any given Mysticism based religion in
pretty much any spiritual work. For instance, I can find parallels to
both Hinduism and Kabbalah in both Pirsig's "Zen and the Art of
Motorcycle Maintenance" and Poe's "Eureka." It's not difficult to find
the parallels because all stem from the same collective archetypes that
form "living myths" within the Collective Unconscious (which, according
to C.G. Jung, everyone's mind shares).
If one like's Bob Dylan, a lot, then pointing out Kabbalah based
symbolism in his songs might prove interesting.
However, Pick's Magnum Opus proposed (insofar as I could make out from
his bizarre posts) to find parallels between Bob Dylan's lyrics,
Kabbalah, and... everything. But since Collective Unconscious
archetypes form the basis of all religions, philosophies, fairytales,
myths, poetry and even popular fiction, one would have to read
everything that has ever been written, tie them all together into one
inconceivably massive tome, then tie all of that in with science,
quantum theory, the existence of multiverses and... fractals. IOW: It's
a fool's errand in that it's too vast in scope for anyone to accomplish.
Pickles appears to have always been batshit crazy, and this is exactly
the type of project that a psychotic would be drawn to as a means of
establishing some sort of order in his perception of reality.
we'll
never know for sure.
>
Actually the archives will show, as Pickering explained it a few times.
Pickles' attempts at explanation were long, rambling, garbled rants that
mangled language almost as much as your posts -- only more
pretentiously.
>
However, based on the data dump of material he
posted from his bibliography, I'm betting it's pretty close.
>
Not really.
>
And he rode around on a bicycle
>
Not unusual for Oregon I'm told
>
mummified cat in his basket
>
Lie and misrepresent much, Pendragon?
Had you not broken my sentence in half, you would have seen that I was
calling it unusual that he rode on a bike *with* a mummified cat sitting
in a basket that was attached to his handlebars. And, yes, I think
that's more than a bit odd.
>
and a small filing cabinet dragging from the
rear fender.
>
This part I can believe, as I've seen people traveling around with set
ups like that
>
his imaginary wife and children,
>
Not true, his late wife actually enjoyed my poetry.
Pick had several wives. At least one of them was real. His 14-year old
Israeli wife was a figment of his imagination... as were the two
children he claimed to have had with her.
>
Faline's spirit who was in contact with him from the Beyond,
>
You don't believe in ghosts?
Not in that way.
Ghosts appear when moments overlap (as written in a Pendragonian
Proverb). I believe that all of time is occurring simultaneously within
one eternal moment. In certain altered states of consciousness when the
Freudian "censoring agent" of one's Pre-conscious mind has been
compromised (this can include such non-drug related causes as stress,
fasting, illness, and exhaustion) one's Blakean "Doors of Perception"
become expanded to the effect that one perceives images (usually
transparent as their moment is superimposed onto the "present" one). We
assume that these are ghosts (disembodied spirits of the dead), when
they are really just images from the almost infinite number of moments
happening simultaneously with the moments constitute our lives.
>
his story
that he draft dodged the Vietnam war by skipping to Canada and Israel
(when he had actually checked himself into a mental institution after
having been caught stealing from Forrest Ackerman...)
>
This part of his story was complicated, I never did quite get Ll the
details straight.
That's because Pickles never admitted to it.
Based on his letters to Forrest Ackerman, as well as on other sources
about Mr. Ackerman, I have been able to piece it all together. The
dates are all in his letters, but I'm not going to pull them up here
(especially as they've already been archived).
The basic story runs as follows: when Pickles was in high school, his
father got drunk and climbed in to his mother's bedroom through her
window. His parents were divorced at the time, since his father had a
history of physically abusing his wife, either she or her mother (the
official story) shot him to death.
Pickles' mother checked herself into an asylum shortly thereafter.
Pickles with his father dead and his mother institutionalized, Pickles
soon found himself homeless. He took to bouncing around between homes
of friends and relatives in the Los Angeles area.
It was around this time that he befriended Forrest Ackerman -- at first
through fan letters, which led to their meeting in person. Forrest,
feeling sorry for the boy, hired him to catalog all of his horror movie
paraphernalia. Ackerman was known for employing for employing young,
pallid, introverted youths as factotums, later thought by several of his
friends (in retrospect of the charges of pedophilia leveled against him
after his death) to have possibly been homosexual boy toys. I'm not
saying that Pickles was... just reporting what I read.
In spite of "Uncle Forry" having taken Pick under his wing, Pick was
caught attempting to leave Forry's house with two suitcases stuffed full
of the movie monster paraphernalia he was being paid by Forry to
catalog. This caused a permanent break to their relationship. Pickles
later attempted to patch things up by apologizing for the theft and
telling Forry that he had checked himself into a mental institution for
roughly half a year and was now better. His attempt to make amends
failed. Forry was finished with him (telling a friend that the thing he
regretted most in his life had been befriending Stephan Pickering).
This took place over the course of about 2 1/2 years beginning IIRC in
Pick's senior year of high school, or else shortly thereafter. Pick
never went to Canada or to Israel, as his letters from this time (when
he'd claimed to have been there) were all posted in and around Los
Angeles. Pick attempted to lie his was out of it with some idiotic
story that he sent his letters from Canada to his friends in Los Angeles
so that they could mail them from LA to Forry. Of course this story
contradicts the content of the letters when he discusses both the
attempted theft and his subsequent institutionalization... but like I
said, he was a pathological liar and a psychopath.
All basically true but filled with Michael Pendragon lies and
misrepresentations.
>
I don't see how one can represent it in a more positive light
>
Okay, you basically covered it well, with just a few corrections from
the.
>
Stephan Pickering was:
>
Jewish. He
self-converted
>
And Dr David Scheimmer verified the document.
>
Stephan Pickering was a converted Jew, which is valid
>
His "Shtar" was nothing more than a letter from some phony Rabbi
>
Scheimmer says it looks legitimate.
Is his name David Schwimmer or David Scheimmer? At the time you were
insisting that it was Schwimmer (like the actor from Friends).
I'm sure it was a real letter from the ersatz Rabbi. But no Jew would
have accepted it as proof of his conversion.
founded his own bizarre offshoot of Judaism.
>
Another "California religion" I take it
Definitely. I'm pretty sure that he was from CA -- but would have to
check the archives to confirm it.
>
Neither this Rabbi, or his
hippy-dippy branch of "Judaism" was accepted by the Conservative or
Orthodox community. Even the Reform Jews looked askance at it.
>
Still doesn't make it not legitimate.
Yes it does. I lived in an Orthodox Jewish community for over 25 years
(and am still connected with it). Orthodox Jews will not accept a
Reform conversion, and will only accept a Conservative conversion if it
is done in strict accordance with the Orthodox Laws. I know this very
well because I spent over half a year trying to find a Conservative
Rabbi who could perform a conversion that the Orthodox community would
consider "Halacal" (legitimate/in keeping with Orthodox Law). Pick's
Rabbi was Reform -- and not just Reform, but way out in left field
Reform. No Orthodox or Conservative Jew would even consider it a
legitimate form of Judaism.
The Jews gave Jesus the stink eye as well.
Jesus was a Jew and his followers were all Jews. So it is wrong to say
that the Jews did not support him. A large group of Jews believed him
to be the Messiah. These Jews became "Christians" after his death.
The Jews who did not believe him to be the Messiah considered him either
a prophet or a poser -- depending on their point of view.
His teachings (at least as presented a century or more after his death)
conflicted with the Laws of the Torah (the Old Testament), and so were
never accepted by Orthodox, Conservative or Reform Jews.
Nobody gave him the stink eye. The Romans crucified him because he
refused to accept Caesar as a god, and was suspected of inciting the
Jews to rebel against Roman rule.
>
His self-conversion would not have been accepted by anyone outside of
the Sun Myung Moon, Jim Jones, Charles Manson set.
>
Again, Scheimmer said it looks legitimate.
And, again, I'm sure that the letter itself was a real letter from the
"Rabbi" in question.
It just would not have been accepted as a legitimate form of conversion
by 99.9% of the Jewish people.
>
I attempted to engage Pickering in several conversations regarding his
posts, but he either ignored them, or spat back some angry, and
impolite, remarks.
>
>
You two were in the middle of a flame war, what did you expect?
Wrong. This was before the flame war. My initial posts to Pickles were
friendly attempts to draw him into a conversation.
>
Similarly anyone who engages in deep scholarship on a subject cannot be
expected to appreciate having a total ignoramus on the subject trying to
explain it to him. So while I don't condone his impoliteness, I can
fully understand it.
>
You nailed it.
>
There is a world of difference between scholarship, and monomaniacal
obsession.
>
Since you're not stranger to obsession I suppose you're speaking from
personal experience, Pendragon.
>
Even I've never carried my pet obsessions even 1/4 so far.
>
That would be for a qualified observer to decide.
No. One would simply have to site an example that was as extreme as
Pick's.
>
Since I didn't relish the idea of getting into a
flamewar with another nutjob
>
You and Senetto seemed to think it wouldn't take much to run Stephan
Pickering off, though, so you went for it.
I didn't expect him to leave. I just enjoyed making him dance. (I have
sadistic tendencies.)
(he reminded me of the 50s group's nutter,
"PhillyGuy"),
I'm not familiar with him.
He was a 45-year old virgin from Philadelphia. I only had to hint that
he was gay and he would fly off the deep end, calling me a Nazi, Satan,
and every other evil name or adjective he could think of.
When I copied his "PhillyGuy" address (by changing the lowercase ells
for ones) he freaked out, accused me of stealing his identity, and
literally killed off his PhillyGuy identity. He then went through a
series of Usernames which I proceeded to provoke him into killing off. I had a lot of fun with PhillyGuy.
I do know that everyone on the 1950s music newsgroup seems to hate you.
>
Why is that, Pendragon/Scarlotti?
The 50s group for the most part hates 50s pop, and champions 50s R&B. When I first joined the group, someone anonymously asked "Who is the
Father of Rock and Roll? Bill Haley or Elvis? This thread got tons of
responses, all championing R&B artists from the late 40s through the
early 50 (before the term "rock and roll" had even been coined). I said
that Pat Boone had a rock hit six months before Elvis (which is true),
but that if we were talking about the "father" (that is, the immediate
predecessor) of rock and I, I'd have to say that it was Johnnie Ray.
Well the shit hit the fan en masse.
The regulars called me all sorts of names, including "racist" (which did
not sit well with me). I called them a few choice names in return, and
the war was on!
>
I took to ignoring his posts. Since he only posted once
or twice a week, ignoring him required little to no effort.
>
Is this why you left the 1950s newsgroup?
>
I left it because I had gotten all I could from it.
>
>
And all the regulars there hate you.
Not all of them. But the majority did.
I'd been at war with them for 10 years. It's to be expected.
>
I had learned more than enough historical information to write my music
book, and wanted to get started on it.
>
Bruce and Diane still go ballistic at the mention of your name.
I don't doubt it. Diane moreso than Bruce.
What really happened on the 1950s music newsgroup?
As noted above, one of my very first posts offended them to the core. It was all downhill from there.
Johnnie Ray is considered to be the father of rock and roll by many
music historians (including Jonny Whiteside, who wrote a bio of Ray
called "Cry"), and musicians like Tony Bennett. They could have simply
accepted that as one of the many possible responses to the anonymous
question, but they had to start accusing me of being a racist because,
God forbid that anyone nominate a white man as the father of Rock n'
Roll!
Usenet groups are a huge time-suck. Just look at the number of posts
we're wasting our time on here. This is why I'll be leaving again soon.
>
Good riddance, of course.
>
You handled that well, IMO. "Skip and ignore" the posts and posters
you don't like; as long as they stay out of your face, everyone wins.
>
Definitely a good policy.
>
Unfortunately, skip and ignore doesn't work
>
It works if you stick with it
>
No,
>
>
Yes it does.
>
it doesn't.
>
I don't agree.
>
I skipped and ignored this > group entirely for
over a year, and came back to find it as cluttered with your
>
Oh, I'll be posting here for as long as I'm able.
No shit, Sherlock. That's why it doesn't work.
>
If you don't like that then perhaps you're better off moving along.
>
At some point Jim and Pickering got into a flamewar regarding Ginsberg.
>
Yes, Senetto almost seems to have a grudge against Allen Ginsberg.
>
Jealousy?
Just a healthy dislike of pedophiles.
don't recall who started it.
>
Senetto at that point was attacking everything Pickering was posting.
>
And Pickles was attacking everything Jim posted.
>
Yes it was an all out flame war by that point.
>
Of course Pickles was defending a NAMBLA member who had sex underaged
boys (Ginsberg)
>
Again, that's a lie and a misrepresentation.
Not at all. Pickles admitting having gone to NAMBLA meetings, NAMBLA
conventions, being friends with NAMBLA members, and having taken NAMBLA
members to dinner, having discussed NAMBLA with them, and found them and
their ideas to be perfectly acceptable.
Pickles also boasted of having statutorily raped two 14-year old girls
(probably a lie, but his boast speaks volumes about his views on the
subject), and supported abolishing the legal age.
>
Allen Ginsberg was never known to have sex with anyone younger than
18-19 and that was just one young guy who was in love with Allen
Ginsberg.
>
This was all posted and archived here a dozen times in 2017-18.
Wikipedia and other web sources say differently.
>
<Snipped out of context misrepresentations and lies about Stephan
Pickering.>
>
Jim Senetto's homophobia and Antisemitism was the cause, basically.
>
Jim Senetto was constantly making anti gay remarks to Pickering, Zod,
even me.
>
You really don't understand what words like anti-gay homophobic mean.
Jim made gay jokes about you for the same reasons that I did: your own
homophobia caused you to launch into a hissyfit on the topic.
>
No, I simply corrected the lies and misrepresentations and set the
record straight, and will continue to.
>
Homophobia was your Michael Cooke of 2018
>
The name is Michael Cook, no e at the end.
>
He also joined in the jeering of 'fake Jew" against Stephan Pickering.
>
Autocorrect typo fixed.
>
Jeering not meeting.
>
if someone is going to cry "Antisemite!" each time
you say anything about him, it's certainly reasonable to point out that
he isn't even Jewish.
>
Again, Pickles claims of being Jewish were a joke. He wanted to be like
Bob Dylan, but he didn't want to take the time to study with a Rabbi, or
to undergo a circumcision (who does?). So he bought himself a yarmulke
and proclaimed himself a Jew.
>
People do concert.
>
My late friend Dan Barfield converted to becoming a Jew when he married
his first wife Judy, at the request of her parents, for example.
If it was a Halachal conversion, he did it under the auspices of a
Rabbi, had a circumcision and was immersed in a Mikvah.
If he self-converted like Pickles, it didn't count.
>
Well, allow me to refresh your memory. Jim and Stephan first got into
flamewars after you formed Team Monkey with him and NastyGoon (NG), a
Pickering
troll.
>
George Dance nailed it ^^^
There is not team, Donkey. Never has been, never will be
Nancy Gene obsessively stalked Stephan Pickering here from the Bob Dylan
newsgroup and began attacking Pickering here.
>
No one has ever denied that. NancyGene obviously didn't like the man.
>
>
Or that Nancy Gene stalked Stephan Pickering here to continue her troll
attacks.
>
where
they (NG's preferred pronoun) would write trollpoems about Stephan.
>
That's really the only interest Nancy Gene had at the time, stalking and
attacking Stephan Pickering.
>
>
That was almost 10 years ago
>
I'm fine with that.
>
Let's move on.
>
result would be Stephan jumping into the Sampler, which would result in
JIm
flaming him and others (for example, Richard Oakley) also being turned
against Jim. I doubt that either Jim nor Stephan realized that you were
manipulating them for that outcome.
>
Pendragon sure had the feeble minded Jim Senetto in his control.
>
Jim isn't here
>
Good riddance.
>
Unfortunately, that's exactly what Pendragon's agenda turned out to be.
>
By the time Google Groups went under last year that's all Pendragon wS
doing, posting his malicious lies and misrepresentations.
>
>
No... when Google Groups went under, I was busy reestablishing AAPC
>
alt.arts.pietry.comments is a Usenet newsgroup, not a Facebook group.
>
HERE is where a.a.p.c. is and will remain.
But what have you done here?
>
The proof of one's agenda is in what one d
>
And you've shown yourself to be a sleazy malicious troll for almost a
decade now, Pendragon.
>
No... created an online community
>
Good for you.
>
Go there.
>
😏
>
I don't think that's anyone's idea of a "sleazy malicious troll."
>
We can show them the Usenet newsgroup archives.
>
So what really happened at the 1950s newsgroup for the other regulars to
drive you away so permanently?
I've told you, Donkey. We started off on the wrong foot, and it
escalated from there.
I left when the discussions became rehashes of material we'd gone over
before. I had nothing further to learn from them.
What have you done for AAPC?
>
Just reading and posting poetry, which is all that's needed or expected.
Since the only ones posting are you and sometimes Rachel, you haven't
got a lot to read.
Let us now turn to Matthew 7:16-20
(King James Version):
>
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns,
or figs of thistles?
>
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree
bringeth forth evil fruit.
>
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree
bring forth good fruit.
>
19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast
into the fire.
>
20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
>
>
Shall we compare fruits?
>
I've never been a fan of Michael Pendragon poetry, sorry.
>
Thank God!
>
>
Agreed.
>
😏
>
I am publishing an AAPC poetry journal featuring award-winning poets.
>
Can you say vanity press?
>
A vanity press charges a "reading" or "submission" fee.
>
Do you pay in contributors copies?
Almost. I don't receive any money for them. They're sold at cost.
After Jim and Stephan became engaged in a prolonged flamewar, both on
and
off the Sampler, the second thing you did was start flooding the group
with
a nasty, libellous document that NG had written.
>
>
Oh yes, the last resort, flood the newsgroup with your lies and
misrepresentations.
>
There was no such "libellous[sic]" document
>
George Dance saw it differently.
He certainly spelled it differently.
>
"There is no 'fact' of 'statutory rape'. 'Morality' -- like
'gnosticism', 'god', haKodesh Barukh hu, 'mysticism' -- are NOT
definable, and for you to keep transposing your stultifying
proto-fascism onto others is not accepted by me."
>
"The 'incest taboo' cannot be predicated on known biology, but is a
human sociopolitical category."
>
"Shalom & Erev tov, everyone...PaederastDeSock knows nothing of the
mother of my 2 children now in Yisra'el. Neither does NaziQueene whose
psychopathy is documented here. He is attempting to equate '14' with
immaturity, or infancy. This is how he mangles reality. They were adults
in the eyes of halakhah...which FakeJewMikey is decidedly not."
>
>
>
Grim times for the poetry newsgroup indeed.
>
Pick didn't belong here.
>
There's no guidelines on who we "allow" to be here.
>
Stephan Pickering knew poetry and made many good poetry posts.
>
>
Wrong
>
I don't agree.
>
The only poetry he posted here
>
Pretty good poetry, as I recall.
>
The only poems he "wrote" were
>
Not true, Stephan Pickering has written some interesting poems over the
years.
>
Wrong.
>
I don't agree.
>
A.A. Milne wrote some interesting tales about "The House a Pooh
Corner" which Pickles plagiarized by sticking a "Kosher" in front of
Piglet's name and claiming as his own on the grounds of "creative
adaption."
>
>
That was an interesting work actually.
The original? Definitely.
The Kosher Kopy? Not at all.
>
The third thing you did, a month or so of that, when Jim and Stephan
were thoroughly
engaged with each other, you went deep diving outside the group for
information on NAMBLA, and found a quotation from Allan Ginsberg
("I have never had sex with anyone under 15"
>
The youngest sex partner Allen Ginsberg is known to have was the 18-19
year old man
14 or 15 according to other sources.
And later it turns out the youngest sex partner Allen Ginsberg is known
to have was an 18-19 year old man.
>
14.
>
No, he was 18 and then turned 19.
>
It depends on the source.
>
There's an interview with the fellow, I don't remember his name right
now.
>
I have to walk my dog for a while.
>
(To be Continued)
>
posting here, calling Ginsberg a "pedophile" (or predator);
>
Which, from the evidence, wasn't true, as shown above.
>
>
and then
when others objected to that (like Stephan, Will, or myself), you began
calling those people "pedophiles" as well.
>
That's when the bullshit from Pendragon began to get heavy.
>
Most likely Jim had condemned Ginsberg as
a child molester
>
Which wasn't actually true, by all evidence.
>
>
Ginsberg was a supporter and member of the North American Man/Boy Love
Association (NAMBLA), a pedophilia and pederasty advocacy organization
in the United States that works to abolish age of consent laws and
legalize sexual relations between adults and children.[124][citation
needed] Saying that he joined the organization "in defense of free
speech",[125] Ginsberg stated: "Attacks on NAMBLA stink of politics,
witchhunting for profit, humorlessness, vanity, anger and ignorance ...
I'm a member of NAMBLA because I love boys too—everybody does, who has a
little humanity".[126] In 1994, Ginsberg appeared in a documentary on
NAMBLA called Chicken Hawk: Men Who Love Boys (playing on the gay male
slang term 'chickenhawk'), in which he read a "graphic ode to
youth".[124] He read his poem "Sweet Boy, Gimme Yr Ass" from the book
Mind Breaths.[127]
>
In her 2002 book Heartbreak, Andrea Dworkin claimed Ginsberg had
ulterior motives for allying with NAMBLA:
In 1982, newspapers reported in huge headlines that the Supreme Court
had ruled child pornography illegal. I was thrilled. I knew Allen would
not be. I did think he was a civil libertarian. But, in fact, he was a
pedophile. He did not belong to the North American Man/Boy Love
Association out of some mad, abstract conviction that its voice had to
be heard. He meant it. I take this from what Allen said directly to me,
not from some inference I made. He was exceptionally aggressive about
his right to fuck children and his constant pursuit of underage
boys.[128]
>
>
and Pickering (who worshipped Ginsberg) spazzed.
>
That is a fair summary of what I just said, though you left out that you
(and Jim)
were calling Stephan a child molester as well. No one appreciates being
called names like that by cowardly trolls on the internet.
>
Again, I remember that.
>
At that point Pendragon and Senetto were trying any dirty trick to drive
Stephan Pickering away from this newsgroup.
>
And so it goes.
>
Pickles claimed to have deflowered two 14-year old girls.
>
Whether he actually did so is unknown, as he has been unequivocally
shown to be a pathological liar.
>
Nevertheless, according to his own admission, he was a child molester
and statutory rapist.
>
--
>
(To be considered)
-- 
Re: The Lime sock on Stephan Pickering and NAMBLA
Re: The Lime sock on Stephan Pickering and NAMBLA