]"I have taken to treating Craig's posts lately in much the same way that I treat Malcolm's, i.e. barely taking the time to read them, if I even do that."
Come on Dave. You jump on the opportunity to shoot me down if you could. I can understand you squinting through one eye at stuff that proves you to be the liar that you are, and can imagine that you had your eyes closed when you wrote the waffle you offered up as a response, but when you use weasel words like "barely read... if I even did that." we KNOW that you are rattled."At least with Brian, he actualy said stuff of interest, whereas Craig's style has turned into taking virtually EVERYTHING that I say (no matter how innocent) and showing how he can turn it around into something evil."
I am deconstructing your waffle like you try to do with everyone else, Dave, which I must say, aint that hard. Lets see, you are trying the old play your critics off each other trick. I am guessing that growing up in a big family one of your parents did this to you, but I can't see anyone you have done your darndest to slander and banish, giving a toss what you think of their effort to expose you."Of course, it always includes distortions of the truth, but that's nothing new coming from Craig. I doubt that it convinces anyone, and so I have stopped responding."
And yet he responds..."However, there is one bit of factual information that I probably should respond to, since it is a genuine mistake on my part."
...to admit he was "factually" wrong the last time he tried to prove I "distorted the truth". Note: "genuine" = inescapable
"Ages ago, Craig went on about a handicapped kid who stayed with us in Victoria. I confused it with a mother and son who stayed with the team when Cherry and I were in Sydney."
What OTHER single mother and kid in a wheelchair are you referring to Dave? For as long as I was in the community we NEVER had a base in Sydney while we had a team in Victoria."I don't think I ever met them. I further said something about getting information from the team by email when, of course, we did not even HAVE email then. It would have been information communicated either by phone or snail mail."
But if Dave is confusing the incident I recounted to ANOTHER kid in a wheelchair who visited the community and had his battery disconnected when he reckons we had a team in both Victoria and Sydney, why not stick to that story, Dave and say we DID have email then?! (Dave knows he is talking through his arse here, and doesn't even bother to think up a good story to cover the bad lie.)"Craig pointed out that he was talking about a mother and son who stayed with us when we were living in Geelong... a time when Cherry and I definitely WERE with the team."
I pointed that out "ages" ago, so what prompted that delayed realisation? And if you are "definite" in agreeing that you were present now, what possessed you to present factually incorrect information and say; "You see, these are the kind of facts that are being left out of so much that Craig (Apostate) is writing."
]"Unfortunately my memory is still very fuzzy about this pair. Maybe Craig can tell me if that was the mother from Tasmania, who was travelling around in a bus. I thought she had TWO kids, however. Nevertheless, Cherry assures me (ah, she's a lifesaver as my memory suffers the ravages of time!) that this is the boy who would use his wheelchair like a weapon to attack others."
That is the same story you told, Dave concerning the boy you "emailed" advice about. Or have you modified that to a snail mail that you sent to people you were "definitely" living with?
"But Craig says, no, his complaint had to do with when we were out for a group run around the block, and I pulled the plug on the wheelchair's battery because the boy was trying to get away from me. I have some vague recollection about a kid in a wheelchair not waiting till the light turned green when we were travelling (probably jogging) around the block near our house,"
Dave's doublethink is reaching a farcical state here. He can't decide if he "barely reads" what I say; is "definite" about agreeing that he lived in the same house in Victoria when he heard from Sydney about a kid using his wheelchair as a weapon to attack others via phone or snail mail (since Craig proved that email had not yet been invented) ; and now has some vague recollection about a kid he never even met, crossing a road against a set of lights while jogging around the block near "our" house!
Why don't you write a letter to Cherry Dave, and she can tell you in a dream who disconnected the battery and when you come to your sense I will spell it out to you plainly "THERE WAS NO TRAFFIC LIGHT" and no traffic, and YOU pulled the plug because you could not stand a ten year old kid turning away from you."...but I accept that my memory is not clear on this."
So do you retract the claim that I distorted the truth by leaving out facts that you now admit were factually false?
"So let's take Craig's version..."
Why Not? That's all we have left when Dave recants his own version as "factually" bullshit.
"The boy was trying to get away from me. full stop. Why? How? It's all pretty unclear, but that's because Craig feels that the horrible offence would be that any adult should ever, under any circumstances, turn the battery off, thus rendering the boy immobile. In true Craig style, he compares it to cutting the boy's legs off. (Of course, because just turning a battery off is hardly consistent with a mass murderer and a serial rapist, whereas cutting legs off is!)"
Whatever, Dave! You accused a 10 year old kid of using his wheelchair as a "weapon", so you might be projecting your violent criminal mindset on to me. My point is that like the incident around this same time when you physically kicked and verbally abused a psychiatric patient that embarrassed you, you are such a control freak, you needed to assert yourself over a ten year-old cripple, by taking his only link to autonomy away from him. It is the same mentality that expresses itself in the decision to whip a black servant whom you accuse of committing petty theft against you in Kenya."So I'm happy to leave it there and let Craig tell the story as he likes. I just want to confess that I did have the time and place confused, as though that makes any significant difference."
If that was supposed to be an honest effort to acknowledge making false statements presented as the kind of facts that I leave out of my "distorted" claims, Dave really does need to read Fran's notes again on the Art of Apologising. I recounted an incident "as it was" and have presented the evidence that exposed Dave lying so it impresses no one to contaminate your "confession" with further insinuations against the truthfulness of my claims.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/15/2008 08:17PM by apostate.