Warning: MHA = acahf hangout



In article <[email protected]>,
Robert Bronsing <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Peter Bowditch" <[email protected]> schreef in
>bericht news:[email protected]...
>> "Doug" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> ><[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >news:[email protected]...
>> >> To any new readers or others who may not be aware of
>> >> this, to you who
>are
>> >> genuinely interested in alt health, please note:
>> >> Anything that you may
>> >post
>> >> to mha is being carefully noted and monitored by your
>> >> "friendly" acahf
>> >rep.
>> >>
>> >> Stop and think, before you post even one word!
>> >>
>> >> This is NO open discussion group, this is a place
>> >> where acahf vultures feed.
>> >>
>> >Even worse, I think one of the posters here may be a
>> >poofter.
>>
>> Not that there's anything wrong with that.
>>
>> Of course, if he was also a Catholic atheist Jew ...
>
>with a ph.d. ....

...who prays to saints and tells LIES!

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my
opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "If I
have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were
standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)
 
[email protected] wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

<snipping only for brevity>:

> Even if he were only reading, and only using the ng to
> harvest leads which might attempt to validate his acahf
> role, that would still reveal a ghoulish or vulture
> mentality, a paucity of spirit. It would already be an
> exploitation, though covert.

> However he actually enters the discussions and redirects
> them to serve his bounty-hunter existence. This prevents
> genuine, free discussion of alt health from even
> beginning.

Nobody here prevents anybody else from speaking their mind.
There is no stifling anyone's free speech (although some
folks have made it plain they'd like too -- but they
can't). Everyone who claims that there is "intimidation",
that they are being denied the opportunity to air their POV
is demonstrating just the opposite by posting what they
want to say.
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Jan) wrote:

> >Subject: Warning: MHA = acahf hangout From:
> >[email protected] Date: 3/8/2004 8:44 PM Pacific
> >Standard Time Message-id:
> ><[email protected]>
> >
> >To any new readers or others who may not be aware of
> >this, to you who are genuinely interested in alt
> >health, please note: Anything that you may post to mha
> >is being carefully noted and monitored by your
> >"friendly" acahf rep.
> >
> >Stop and think, before you post even one word!
> >
> >This is NO open discussion group, this is a place where
> >acahf vultures feed.
>
> Correct. Now those vultures will follow this post, one by
> one. Some will make numerous posts. Most all are either
> Jews or atheists.

Really? I am neither.

Why are you so obsessed with Jews? Or atheists?

[Snip]

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do
|you inconvenience me with questions?"
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] wrote:

> "HCN" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > Hello HCN. If what you're saying is so, then it will
> > > be a simple matter for you to present posts showing
> > > that particular poster to be from acahf. I have not
> > > seen any.
> > >
> > > > Oh... in case you missed it, folks from the NCAHF
> > > > also post here once in a while.
> > >
> > > How are they recognisable?
> > >
> > > "Once in a while" has a different effect on the
> > > possibility of alt health discussion, particularly
> > > spontaneous or candid discussion, than does permanent
> > > residence of such rep.
> > >
> > ...
> >
> > Why should you care?
>
> Because I believe there would be immense value in allowing
> truly free discussion of "alt health".

Really? And what, pray tell, is preventing this "truly free"
discussion? Similarly, shouldn't a "truly free discussion"
actually mean "truly free discussion"? In other words,
shouldn't it mean a discussion that encompasses those who
are skeptical of alt-med as well as its advocates?

What about these alleged ACAHF members stops you or anyone
else from posting whatever they like or talking about
whatever they like?

>Yet various things prevent it from happening, other than in
>rare instances.

Really? What, specifically? Please be specific and include
an example or two.

> The presence of acahf is yet another limiting factor.

Really? How, specifically, does ACAHF "limit" a "truly
free" discussion? Please be specific and include an
example or two.

> > It is a free and open discussion of the pros and cons of
> > alternative health.
>
> Yes, it is not here for bounty hunters to sit back with
> their rifles, waiting for the next kill or culling.

Oh, please. Stop whining. It really ill becomes you.

[Snip]

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do
|you inconvenience me with questions?"
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Mark Probert-March 9, 2004" <Mark [email protected]>
wrote:

> "Peter Bowditch" <[email protected]> wrote in
> message news:[email protected]...
> > [email protected] wrote:
> >
> > >"HCN" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > >> news:[email protected]...
> > >> >
> > >> > Hello HCN. If what you're saying is so, then it
> > >> > will be a simple matter for you to present posts
> > >> > showing that particular poster to be from acahf. I
> > >> > have not seen any.
> > >> >
> > >> > > Oh... in case you missed it, folks from the NCAHF
> > >> > > also post here
> once
> > >> > > in a while.
> > >> >
> > >> > How are they recognisable?
> > >> >
> > >> > "Once in a while" has a different effect on the
> > >> > possibility of alt health discussion, particularly
> > >> > spontaneous or candid discussion, than does
> > >> > permanent residence of such rep.
> > >> >
> > >> ...
> > >>
> > >> Why should you care?
> > >
> > >Because I believe there would be immense value in
> > >allowing truly free discussion of "alt health". Yet
> > >various things prevent it from
> happening,
> > >other than in rare instances.
> >
> > It always amazes me that alties seem afraid to discuss
> > things in front of dissenters. Why are they so
> > frightened?
>
> Because in AltWorld, thereis no dissent, only adulation.

Sadly, all too true in too many cases. Anyone who dissents
or exhibits any skepticism at all towards even the wildest
altie claims is immediately labeled an enemy, a
representative of NCAHF, a paid stooge of the pharmaceutical
companies, etc., etc.

[Snip]

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do
|you inconvenience me with questions?"
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Mark Probert-March 9, 2004" <Mark [email protected]>
wrote:

> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "HCN" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > "HCN" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > ...> > It is not a secret.
> > > >
> > > > That an acahf rep resides on MHA?
> > > >
> > > > I was not aware of it.
> > > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > Then you are either:
> > >
> > > 1) Fairly new to newsgroups and to m.h.a
> > >
> > > or
> > >
> > > 2) Very close minded
> >
> > Hello HCN. If what you're saying is so, then it will be
> > a simple matter for you to present posts showing that
> > particular poster to be from acahf.
> I
> > have not seen any.
>
> It is in the archives. Do you think anyone has a
> responsibility to bring you up to date when you join
> a group?
>
> > > Oh... in case you missed it, folks from the NCAHF also
> > > post here once in a while.
> >
> > How are they recognisable?
>
> They have horns on their posts, and the post via black
> helicopters.

Don't forget that they also hole up in their deep bunkers
under the United Nations, the better to control the
world. ;-)

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do
|you inconvenience me with questions?"
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] wrote:

> "Mark Probert-March 9, 2004" <Mark Probert03-09-
> [email protected]> wrote:
> > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > "HCN" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > <[email protected]> wrote in message

> > > "Once in a while" has a different effect on the
> > > possibility of alt health discussion, particularly
> > > spontaneous or candid discussion, than does permanent
> > > residence of such rep.
> >
> > Why? Anyone can read the newsgroup without posting and
> > you would never know it. It makes no difference.
>
> Even if he were only reading, and only using the ng to
> harvest leads which might attempt to validate his acahf
> role, that would still reveal a ghoulish or vulture
> mentality, a paucity of spirit. It would already be an
> exploitation, though covert.
>
> However he actually enters the discussions and redirects
> them to serve his bounty-hunter existence. This prevents
> genuine, free discussion of alt health from even
> beginning.

How, specifically? Please also include specific examples of
posts that "prevented genuine, free discussions of alt
health from even beginning" and explain exactly how they
accomplished such a feat.

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do
|you inconvenience me with questions?"
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Mark Probert-March 9, 2004" <Mark [email protected]>
wrote:

> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...

> > And I think I still have the right to convey what I now
> > know, to others.
>
> Of course you do. As anyone here does. No one is saying
> that you don't, and your comment is quite typical of the
> proponents of alt med who seem to think that everyone is
> out to stifle them.

Sadly, all too often alties seem to forget that freedom of
speech does NOT mean freedom FROM criticism. All too often,
they interpret criticism of their cherished treatments as an
attempt to "suppress" their freedom of speech.

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do
|you inconvenience me with questions?"
 
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 01:30:01 GMT, Orac <[email protected]> wrote:

> Anyone who dissents or exhibits any skepticism at all
> towards even the wildest altie claims is immediately
> labeled an enemy, a representative of NCAHF, a paid stooge
> of the pharmaceutical companies,

Or of being an atheist, jew or queer (or all three at once)

Aloha,

Rich
>
>[Snip]

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

The best defense to logic is ignorance
 
"Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:eek:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (Jan) wrote:
>
> > >Subject: Warning: MHA = acahf hangout From:
> > >[email protected] Date: 3/8/2004 8:44 PM
> > >Pacific Standard Time Message-id:
> > ><[email protected]>
> > >
> > >To any new readers or others who may not be aware of
> > >this, to you who
are
> > >genuinely interested in alt health, please note:
> > >Anything that you may
post
> > >to mha is being carefully noted and monitored by your
> > >"friendly" acahf
rep.
> > >
> > >Stop and think, before you post even one word!
> > >
> > >This is NO open discussion group, this is a place where
> > >acahf vultures feed.
> >
> > Correct. Now those vultures will follow this post, one
> > by one. Some will
make
> > numerous posts. Most all are either Jews or atheists.
>
> Really? I am neither.
>
> Why are you so obsessed with Jews? Or atheists?

They are easier to demonize than those who are of the
Christian persuasion, as long as the person of the Christian
persuasion does not also pray to Saints.
 
"Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:eek:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (Jan) wrote:
>
> > >Subject: Warning: MHA = acahf hangout From:
> > >[email protected] Date: 3/8/2004 8:44 PM
> > >Pacific Standard Time Message-id:
> > ><[email protected]>
> > >
> > >To any new readers or others who may not be aware of
> > >this, to you who
are
> > >genuinely interested in alt health, please note:
> > >Anything that you may
post
> > >to mha is being carefully noted and monitored by your
> > >"friendly" acahf
rep.
> > >
> > >Stop and think, before you post even one word!
> > >
> > >This is NO open discussion group, this is a place where
> > >acahf vultures feed.
> >
> > Correct. Now those vultures will follow this post, one
> > by one. Some will
make
> > numerous posts. Most all are either Jews or atheists.
>
> Really? I am neither.
>
> Why are you so obsessed with Jews? Or atheists?

They are easier to demonize than those who are of the
Christian persuasion, as long as the person of the Christian
persuasion does not also pray to Saints.
 
"Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:eek:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (Jan) wrote:
>
> > >Subject: Warning: MHA = acahf hangout From:
> > >[email protected] Date: 3/8/2004 8:44 PM
> > >Pacific Standard Time Message-id:
> > ><[email protected]>
> > >
> > >To any new readers or others who may not be aware of
> > >this, to you who
are
> > >genuinely interested in alt health, please note:
> > >Anything that you may
post
> > >to mha is being carefully noted and monitored by your
> > >"friendly" acahf
rep.
> > >
> > >Stop and think, before you post even one word!
> > >
> > >This is NO open discussion group, this is a place where
> > >acahf vultures feed.
> >
> > Correct. Now those vultures will follow this post, one
> > by one. Some will
make
> > numerous posts. Most all are either Jews or atheists.
>
> Really? I am neither.
>
> Why are you so obsessed with Jews? Or atheists?

They are easier to demonize than those who are of the
Christian persuasion, as long as the person of the Christian
persuasion does not also pray to Saints.
 
"Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:eek:[email protected]...
> In article
> <[email protected]>, "Mark
> Probert-March 9, 2004" <Mark Probert03-09-
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > "HCN" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > > "HCN" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > ...> > It is not a secret.
> > > > >
> > > > > That an acahf rep resides on MHA?
> > > > >
> > > > > I was not aware of it.
> > > > >
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > Then you are either:
> > > >
> > > > 1) Fairly new to newsgroups and to m.h.a
> > > >
> > > > or
> > > >
> > > > 2) Very close minded
> > >
> > > Hello HCN. If what you're saying is so, then it will
> > > be a simple
matter
> > > for you to present posts showing that particular
> > > poster to be from
acahf.
> > I
> > > have not seen any.
> >
> > It is in the archives. Do you think anyone has a
> > responsibility to bring
you
> > up to date when you join a group?
> >
> > > > Oh... in case you missed it, folks from the NCAHF
> > > > also post here
once in
> > > > a while.
> > >
> > > How are they recognisable?
> >
> > They have horns on their posts, and the post via black
> > helicopters.
>
> Don't forget that they also hole up in their deep bunkers
> under the United Nations, the better to control the
> world. ;-)

Did you see the show on WNBC two weekends ago about
underground NYC? If not, you do not know how close you
are....can you say Grand Central Station?
 
"Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:eek:[email protected]...
> In article
> <[email protected]>, "Mark
> Probert-March 9, 2004" <Mark Probert03-09-
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > "HCN" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > > "HCN" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > ...> > It is not a secret.
> > > > >
> > > > > That an acahf rep resides on MHA?
> > > > >
> > > > > I was not aware of it.
> > > > >
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > Then you are either:
> > > >
> > > > 1) Fairly new to newsgroups and to m.h.a
> > > >
> > > > or
> > > >
> > > > 2) Very close minded
> > >
> > > Hello HCN. If what you're saying is so, then it will
> > > be a simple
matter
> > > for you to present posts showing that particular
> > > poster to be from
acahf.
> > I
> > > have not seen any.
> >
> > It is in the archives. Do you think anyone has a
> > responsibility to bring
you
> > up to date when you join a group?
> >
> > > > Oh... in case you missed it, folks from the NCAHF
> > > > also post here
once in
> > > > a while.
> > >
> > > How are they recognisable?
> >
> > They have horns on their posts, and the post via black
> > helicopters.
>
> Don't forget that they also hole up in their deep bunkers
> under the United Nations, the better to control the
> world. ;-)

Did you see the show on WNBC two weekends ago about
underground NYC? If not, you do not know how close you
are....can you say Grand Central Station?
 
"Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:eek:[email protected]...
> In article
> <[email protected]>, "Mark
> Probert-March 9, 2004" <Mark Probert03-09-
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > "HCN" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > > "HCN" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > ...> > It is not a secret.
> > > > >
> > > > > That an acahf rep resides on MHA?
> > > > >
> > > > > I was not aware of it.
> > > > >
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > Then you are either:
> > > >
> > > > 1) Fairly new to newsgroups and to m.h.a
> > > >
> > > > or
> > > >
> > > > 2) Very close minded
> > >
> > > Hello HCN. If what you're saying is so, then it will
> > > be a simple
matter
> > > for you to present posts showing that particular
> > > poster to be from
acahf.
> > I
> > > have not seen any.
> >
> > It is in the archives. Do you think anyone has a
> > responsibility to bring
you
> > up to date when you join a group?
> >
> > > > Oh... in case you missed it, folks from the NCAHF
> > > > also post here
once in
> > > > a while.
> > >
> > > How are they recognisable?
> >
> > They have horns on their posts, and the post via black
> > helicopters.
>
> Don't forget that they also hole up in their deep bunkers
> under the United Nations, the better to control the
> world. ;-)

Did you see the show on WNBC two weekends ago about
underground NYC? If not, you do not know how close you
are....can you say Grand Central Station?
 
"Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:eek:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] wrote:
>
> > "HCN" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > >
> > > > Hello HCN. If what you're saying is so, then it will
> > > > be a simple matter for you to present posts showing
> > > > that particular poster to be from acahf. I have not
> > > > seen any.
> > > >
> > > > > Oh... in case you missed it, folks from the NCAHF
> > > > > also post here
once
> > > > > in a while.
> > > >
> > > > How are they recognisable?
> > > >
> > > > "Once in a while" has a different effect on the
> > > > possibility of alt health discussion, particularly
> > > > spontaneous or candid discussion, than does
> > > > permanent residence of such rep.
> > > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > Why should you care?
> >
> > Because I believe there would be immense value in
> > allowing truly free discussion of "alt health".
>
> Really? And what, pray tell, is preventing this "truly
> free" discussion? Similarly, shouldn't a "truly free
> discussion" actually mean "truly free discussion"? In
> other words, shouldn't it mean a discussion that
> encompasses those who are skeptical of alt-med as well as
> its advocates?
>
> What about these alleged ACAHF members stops you or anyone
> else from posting whatever they like or talking about
> whatever they like?

Toby just does not want anyone around who may be
authoritative on the fraud of alternative medicine.

> >Yet various things prevent it from happening, other than
> >in rare instances.
>
> Really? What, specifically? Please be specific and include
> an example or two.

Good question. I have yet to see any of the Alties actually
being stifled. I do not recall any Altie whose ISP yanked
their account or a email service provider actually cancelled
their service. Likewise, I have not seen any Alties'
employer being contacted.

> > The presence of acahf is yet another limiting factor.
>
> Really? How, specifically, does ACAHF "limit" a "truly
> free" discussion? Please be specific and include an
> example or two.

Toby seems to "think" that a member of ACAHF does not
have the same right to post and participate in m.h.a.
that Toby does.

> > > It is a free and open discussion of the pros and cons
> > > of alternative health.
> >
> > Yes, it is not here for bounty hunters to sit back with
> > their rifles, waiting for the next kill or culling.
>
> Oh, please. Stop whining. It really ill becomes you.

That was her best argument....snicker....
 
"Orac" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:eek:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] wrote:
>
> > "HCN" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > >
> > > > Hello HCN. If what you're saying is so, then it will
> > > > be a simple matter for you to present posts showing
> > > > that particular poster to be from acahf. I have not
> > > > seen any.
> > > >
> > > > > Oh... in case you missed it, folks from the NCAHF
> > > > > also post here
once
> > > > > in a while.
> > > >
> > > > How are they recognisable?
> > > >
> > > > "Once in a while" has a different effect on the
> > > > possibility of alt health discussion, particularly
> > > > spontaneous or candid discussion, than does
> > > > permanent residence of such rep.
> > > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > Why should you care?
> >
> > Because I believe there would be immense value in
> > allowing truly free discussion of "alt health".
>
> Really? And what, pray tell, is preventing this "truly
> free" discussion? Similarly, shouldn't a "truly free
> discussion" actually mean "truly free discussion"? In
> other words, shouldn't it mean a discussion that
> encompasses those who are skeptical of alt-med as well as
> its advocates?
>
> What about these alleged ACAHF members stops you or anyone
> else from posting whatever they like or talking about
> whatever they like?

Toby just does not want anyone around who may be
authoritative on the fraud of alternative medicine.

> >Yet various things prevent it from happening, other than
> >in rare instances.
>
> Really? What, specifically? Please be specific and include
> an example or two.

Good question. I have yet to see any of the Alties actually
being stifled. I do not recall any Altie whose ISP yanked
their account or a email service provider actually cancelled
their service. Likewise, I have not seen any Alties'
employer being contacted.

> > The presence of acahf is yet another limiting factor.
>
> Really? How, specifically, does ACAHF "limit" a "truly
> free" discussion? Please be specific and include an
> example or two.

Toby seems to "think" that a member of ACAHF does not
have the same right to post and participate in m.h.a.
that Toby does.

> > > It is a free and open discussion of the pros and cons
> > > of alternative health.
> >
> > Yes, it is not here for bounty hunters to sit back with
> > their rifles, waiting for the next kill or culling.
>
> Oh, please. Stop whining. It really ill becomes you.

That was her best argument....snicker....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back