Emails from the Token

[wags]

----- Original Message -----
From: xxx@yahoo.com
To: xxx
Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2014 11:14 PM
Subject: Wags post


Re: The Hutchison Consortium Discussions
by wags » Sun Mar 30, 2014 12:44 am

Thanks Linda for pointing to that link I see we have been mentioned by the Narcissist and am minded to reply here as am not a member over there.

StarCat wrote On HUT:
What university is doing the testing?

Cat
Nancy Hutchison Responded on HUT:-
the one that will not be harassed, threatened and intimidated
by you, Linda Brown, Wags or anyone else
...until they make their findings public

I refute entirely that Nancy Hutchison has been subject to harassement, or threatened or intimidated. I would contend that this is behaviour that Nancy has exhibited towards myself and others. I guess it is more projection.

I cite her behaviour in relation to the potential and actual publication of her PM to myself relating to NSA. Also the behaviour of the the Hutchison Commune towards a neighbour in relation to threats and intimidation. (More data, evidence can be supplied). If you want to make alligations make them where a right of reply is possible Nancy.

I believe there is something very important that was stated here:

If you want to make alligations make them where a right of reply is possible Nancy.

And I would say the same in regard to yourself, Linda, hobbit and fruitbat. Post your digs, contributions, arguments, agreements or even innuendo in regard to a post made here. If you can't because you are not a member, then that is easily rectified. However, if you are a member and you don't post but will comment somewhere other than where the post was made then what is to be said of you?

I can't post where I am talked about as well as a few others that are on this site. I can't post where individuals come here as a thief in the night and copy posts only to take them somewhere else where, as you so eloquently put it, make allegations and then those individuals discussed have no right to a reply.

Really wags? I thought you were more intelligent than that. Prove me right and join so that you may have the right to reply otherwise, can you see how your comment is...just wrong?

Mikado

Mr Mikado.

Okay I can see that the comment was aimed at one Nancy Hutchison, and maybe I could have phrased it slightly differently as logging in is patiently possible (I am after all writing direct), but the question is why focus on myself when the intelligent man would see the point highlights a significant behavioural pattern of Nancy.

Wags

[StarCat]

Luis says he has a good guess on the source of the e-mails. Are you going to elaborate on that Luis? I'm just curious for my own sake. I know it isn't me. I have my paws full with cats and kittens. Seriously.

Cat

[Mikado14]

I must say that there are two different yahoo accounts they come from. I suspect one is from Linda, don't know who the other one is but I have my suspicions.

Mikado

[LuisP]

Sure Cat, I can elaborate.

“I have my paws full with cats and kittens. Seriously”

Have no doubts about it. And that, besides all of those, as any good cat, your paws are also “clean”.

This isn’t anything of the sort like degrading radiation or breaking gravity so, no, from a simple, practical and intuitive judgment, whoever sends those emails has a profile very unlike yours.

But like that of a hypocrite, who is both compulsively suspicious and manipulative to the point of being manic paranoid. And belonging to someone who, yes, mostly that, also likes, thrives and profits from creating storms. Meaning, drama.

Because otherwise, after being looked over once, most would not think it worthwhile of a second glance.

Pretty neat and straightforward, I guess.

I could substantiate this a lot further with Factum, Opinio and Conclusio, going backwards into Praecedens and sideways into Simile as grounds for my Decisio (sorry, rough day at the office with lots of Latin thrown around) but it seems rather Futilis (there ya go) given the very evident nature of the Reincidentiae (argh !) culprit.

Then again, once again, what do I know.

“O tempora ! O mores !”

Damn ... !

[Mikado14]

Sure Cat, I can elaborate.

“I have my paws full with cats and kittens. Seriously”

Have no doubts about it. And that, besides all of those, as any good cat, your paws are also “clean”.

This isn’t anything of the sort like degrading radiation or breaking gravity so, no, from a simple, practical and intuitive judgment, whoever sends those emails has a profile very unlike yours.

But like that of a hypocrite, who is both compulsively suspicious and manipulative to the point of being manic paranoid. And belonging to someone who, yes, mostly that, also likes, thrives and profits from creating storms. Meaning, drama.

Because otherwise, after being looked over once, most would not think it worthwhile of a second glance.

Pretty neat and straightforward, I guess.

I could substantiate this a lot further with Factum, Opinio and Conclusio, going backwards into Praecedens and sideways into Simile as grounds for my Decisio (sorry, rough day at the office with lots of Latin thrown around) but it seems rather Futilis (there ya go) given the very evident nature of the Reincidentiae (argh !) culprit.

Then again, once again, what do I know.

“O tempora ! O mores !”

Damn ... !

HA!....love it.

Mikado

[Mikado14]

Well I received two more emails today, I am not going to post them but I have decided that I am going to save Linda from herself.

I am banning her IP's for awhile. I think she needs the break from persistent reading here from about 4 times a day to a high of 8. She needs help from her obsession of copying and pasting and I am sure commenting, at least from the posts that have been emailed to me.

She needs help and this is the only way I know of calming down her obsessions, may she catch her breath.

I will say this, who the hell does she think she is to "demand" that I put out information etc from my work? By her own admission, she doesn't know crap about the science so...why? She was offered to come here a while ago, didn't even answer my invitation and then made comments later that I fell on my face. I have news for her, the only reason any information was out there is because Pladuim got over zealous and posted information on the Pegasus. I then verified it to control the situation.

That is the only reason anything was released. My work is not done and no information will be given out until such time as it is. Afterall, Brown never gave out anything so I will take my lesson from him for after all, he was Linda's Dad and according to her...well...why not take a lesson from him?....Mr. Gracious and Resolute himself.

Mikado

[LuisP]

Cheers (Burp !).

That said,
For the record and FWIW, I really am against banishments except In Extremis Condicio.

Meaning, untolerable.

A lurker, whatever his/hers Obsession, fits no such extreme condition. And may give ground for Criterea questioning. Where to Start and where to Stop ?

From where I'm standing - allow me, Mikado, the free speech - this is a mistake and one that is not even prone to being correct.

It will remain a mistake.

More, Ad Hominem decisions are not "your thing", but someone else's.

Why do it ?

Because "you can" ?

[Mikado14]

Point well taken.

However, it is not a banishment but a respite for I did say for "awhile". From the few emails that I have received, she is appears to be almost ready to froth at the mouth. As much as I attempt to distance myself from her, it just doesn't happen.

I sincerely felt that this was a prudent step to allow her some "time out". Her accusations and conclusions are only getting the more and more incredulous.....even for her. She claims that she won't post here and has nothing to say about anything posted here but yet from the emails and the entry links from the Token, it appears she has quite a good deal to say, hypocritical from my view. She actually posts in response, as if the posted in the originating forum and that these people are actually going to another forum to read her response, narcissistic at the very least. If not for the emails or the entry links I wouldn't know or for that matter, I really don't care but then when someone criticizes someone else for an action and then does so themselves, they need to be taken to task and have it pointed out. Not that it will have an effect on one with such sociopathic behaviour patterns.

Well, it is not a banishment, as mentioned, but a "time-out" administered to a petulant little girl who can't be civil and play as other's play.

Mikado

[LuisP]

Well, a bit of a spanking (ahem) may be an healthy initiative, I guess.

Thing is, there are some who like it.

So that they can cry harder.

And, yes, to the likes of these, you just made their day.



Think about it …

[StarCat]

Latin and spankings all in one day. Reminds me of Catholic school back in the 1960's. Then the second Vatican council decided that Mass could be said in something other than Latin. I don't know what was decided about spankings. I went to public school after kindergarten. Oh well, a walkk down memory lane.

Cat