Speaking to God:
Saint David
it will help others. I hope so. I don't think all the fighting is
helping anyone here.
"Sorry, I can't find the letter you wrote asking about how to speak to
God...
I still disagree with Baruch that you can "simply talk to God." We all
do that. (Those of us who believe...) But why doesn't God "simply
answer back?"
My feeling is it is because we are not "tuned in" to God's voice or
"channel." We really are afraid of God. We think God rules all our
lives, makes the Universe run and sees us as worth little of His time
or energy. Because of our fears and upsetting ideas about God we
simply refuse to listen when God talks.
What I did was start to have "an attitude of Gratitude." I just
started to thank God every day for the good things I could think of.
Knowing how to talk to angels I was already prepared to hear answers
if any came. This is why, to me, it is so important to talk to angels.
Being that they are a bit more like us, we feel more at ease with
them. Opening up to them and listening to their conversation with us
we get used to their "channel." We need to become "receptive." Anyone
can talk to God, but few are able to hear the answer. This is because,
as God Himself told me, people do not want to hear Him. They do not
want to feel guilty or ashamed or upset, which is what the Bible
teaches happens to most people that talk to God. In the Bible he is
often blustery, officious, sometimes even mean.
Spirituality is not a subject most people want in their lives, ghosts,
spirits, angels and God are not beings to be trusted and loved or who
love us, they are scary archetypes and when they speak, we "enter
another world." One so different from ours that even Baruch explained
once that we think we might even die if we go too far!
All these fears and delusions MUST be given up. This is where Baruch
failed in his explanations. Fear of God is NOT necessary. In fact it
is a flat-out obstacle to hearing from God. Once I removed the
obstacles of fear and realized angels are "born" to help us fully and
completely and without hesitation, and the God is not a manipulator
but rather a facilitator, I came to realize that hearing spirit voices
was in no way harmful. They are just like people. If they don't make
sense or they seem crude or stupid, you simply tune them out. But on a
Spiritual level most voices I deal with seem to be pretty wonderful
beings. So I began to have, as you know, lengthy converstions with
Spirit. As I did this I began to thank God for everything. One day I
heard the channeled thought: "You're welcome!" I almost jumped out of
my skin! I asked point blank: "Is this God?" The answer was "Yes. You
thanked me and I said you are welcome, and you are." There began my
own "conversations with God." They were and are exactly the same as my
conversations with angels. Except for one vast difference. God
actually works instantly when dealing with me...that is physically.
I have had some trouble with anxiety. One night I couldn't get to
sleep. I asked God to please take away my anxiety. Like taking a magic
pill, the anxiety suddenly passed away as if it were nothing! So now I
could talk to God and if I had a headache it could be cured, if I was
depressed it would be lifted, if I was afraid I was calmed. How did
this occur? God explains it thus: "I am the INDWELLING aspect of God.
I am God in You. I am the part of you that is God. I am right here
with you at all times. Unlike the angels who dwell all around you in
another dimension, I am right here now inside of your being, infusing
it, as I infuse everything. Therefore if you need help, I do not need
to "work on it." It is done instantly."
So basically talking to God is the same as talking to angels, with the
benefit of His being right there. Yet oddly, God's 'voice' can sound
feminine, or it can be masculine and light, or serious, depending on
what He is trying to tell me and of course depending on my mood, needs
or expecations. This can be disconcerting, because everyone thinks God
is a Single Being with a consistant personality, instead of
understanding that God is Everything and Everyone. Of course people
will say "If you hear a feminine voice, then it can't be God!" Again,
getting rid of all preconceived notions or prejudices is MANDATORY if
you are going to hear from God. As we know, angels speak through every
device and way imaginable! TV, radio, tapes, other people, animals,
voices we hear or we think, gut feelings, etc. Well they are just
practicing what God does naturally because, guess what? HE IS ALL
THOSE THINGS. So to deny God access to us because She decides to speak
in a feminine manner or because He decides to use a television program
to explain something we need to hear, is to deny the principle that
God is All. We find it hard to speak to God because we narrow Him in
to Him, Her, It, Them, Us, etc. So to hear from God, open up the heart
and mind. Talk to God as if He were your best, closest friend in the
whole world. Talk as if you were talking to me! God WANTS to answer,
wants us to listen and wants to help us. No one person is God's
spokesman. No one person His holy prophet. No one person His son or
daughter. (He has explained this to me over and over and eventually
this is what my second book will be about...This whole idea that
somehow a person who acts like a jack-ass or whom is not well-loved by
other peopleis suddenly unable to communicate with God, is ridiculous.
If that were true, no one would have ever talked with God. As it is,
He claims so few do that it is rather pathetic. But He talks to them
all the time, every day. Regardless of whether they hear Him or not."
copyright 2002, David St. Albans-Pudelwitts
(copying and distorting this letter will be seen to be an infringement
of the copyright holder's rights.)
Namaste'!
David T. St. Albans
Angels:
http://www.geocities.com/Eureka/Concourse/3658/speakbook.html
http://www.geocities.com/Eureka Concourse/3658/index.html
Artwork:
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/minnetonka/359/index.html
Saint David
> it will help others. I hope so. I don't think all the fighting is
> helping anyone here.
P.S. This is how I act when I feel defeated and/or want to give the impression
that I am innocent in the eyes of authorities. (Regardless of how the Google
archives record my abusive behavior up to about 10 hours ago.)
angelicusrex
message meant for trolls and sock-puppets, but rather for the decent people
who read these pages. By the way, there are no "authorities" here, except
those who think of themselves that way in their own minds. And I abuse no
one, who isn't abusive in the first place. That's my privilege.
My advice to poor abused Boggle and everyone else: If you cannot take it,
stop dishing it out.
BTW, here is some info I got from "supernews.com" Boggle's posting ISP of
the day...
>Don't "feed" or "poke" the trolls, and try to get your group to use
killfiles and ignore them. nfilter, available for free at
www.nfilter.org, can add sophisticated news filtering options to
most newsreader software which does not already include such
functionality, although you may wish to investigate other
newsreaders with built in filter capabilities first.
Note a professional service provider recommends Kill-filing.
> The alt.cuddle
FAQ offers sage advice for dealing with Trolls - check
http://www.compusmart.ab.ca/bcp/acfaq.htm#A20 for the full scoop.
Disruptors who "nym-shift" or use "sock puppets" to avoid killfiling
are most likely to have action taken; likewise if they resort to
flooding (by our standards - it needn't be hundreds of articles per
day), repeatedly posting binaries to non-binary groups, or clearly
state that it is their intent to disrupt the group.
Boggle take note.
> Reports of forgery or impersonation should be mailed from the
address being forged/impersonated, or other information
substantiating that you are the "rightful user" of the name or
domain should be provided. Forgery and impersonation must be easily
seen - simple use of a regular's non-unique given name when
"signing-off" (without the use of their signature, address, last
name, etc, or near matches) is hard to establish as forgery or
impersonation unless they in some way directly claim to be the other
person. We will gladly block forged addresses and improper use of
someone else's domain, but we need to hear from the owner of the
address/domain, and have that "ownership" validated in some manner
(by exchanging mail or a 'whois').
I did this. Which is why I got the response.
> Non-exact forgeries (ie, billgates@micro$oft.com) are difficult to
block (as they can change), and are arguably not actual forgeries
but parodies. We will do what we can, but cannot make any
guarantees. Ignoring parodies is likely to yield the best results.
Ignorance is bliss in the eyes of the computer professionals.
We appreciate your report!
Supernews Abuse Desk
ab...@supernews.net
"Saint David >>" <<<whispe...@msn.com>
This is a direct forgery of my e-mail address and I will deal with it
accordingly. And all you Boggle sock-puppets can whine and complain and call
me names as much as you like. You are still wrong.
> P.S. This is how I act when I feel defeated and/or want to give the
impression
> that I am innocent in the eyes of authorities. (Regardless of how the
Google
> archives record my abusive behavior up to about 10 hours ago.)
forgery and plagiarism and copyright infringement are NOT valid ways of
behaving simply because you feel abused, Boggle. They are crimes. And you
are a criminal. As such, in my mind you lose all rights to being treated
with any respect or consideration by me. You are not "the authorities." I
have not been convicted either by the State or a jury of my peers. You have
brought no evidence in any case. You are a pompous ass and a living joke.
That is simply a statement of fact. Don't like it? Too bad. When they put
you in the slammer for forging checks, tell 'em St. All-Bans made you do it!
angelicusrex
Right you are. Check the codes.
Baruch
angelicusrex
<angeli...@spammesenseless.com> wrote in message
news:7q90vucgubpr5jl54...@4ax.com...
> You lie. You abuse me, without cause.
You lie. You are not anyone. How can I abuse a nobody? You are using my
name. Therefore, if I abuse anyone it must be myself. You are an idiot. And
a preening little toady. A talentless hack. So enjoy the abuse you suck up.
Saint, ... I'm nowhere near
> through with you.
Who cares? It's your worthless life, Baruch. Do with it what you like. You
have affected me not one iota, except to take up some time better spent
perhaps surfing for porn or eating broken glass! LOL!
> Like I said once before, I'm just now warming up to
> the task.
Oh, please, your dismal threats are ludicrous! No one takes them seriously.
You are a LOSER. have a big L engraved on your forehead, you poor twisted
schmuck!
> That's the exact same advice I've been giving to you. If you can't
> take it, then stop dishing it out.
You stop dishing it out, your portly little pigeon! You're the one who can't
take it! "Oh, David is abusing me! Weep, weep!" Oh we all pity your poor,
tormented soul, I'm sure. In fact anything done on the net to me is a waste
of your time. Maybe one day you'll shoot me, because I abused yo so badly?
Tell it to whomever really DID abuse you as a kid! You are SICK, boggle. A
scared, neurotic little boy! And you disgust me.
Don't "feed" or "poke" the trolls, they say!
But they're so cute when they are angry!
> Right. The problem with kill-filing is that it has to check each
> message against the entire list in the kill file. The more people in
> there, the more time it takes. At some point, it takes a ridiculously
> long amount of time, and it's going to slow down your newsgroup
> reading. It has its downside, as does everything else.
Yeah, right "Boggle..." Who has suddenly become Baruch. I knew it...The
pattern has finally come through.
> Uh, that's to disrupt the group. Boggle has been posting very clever
> parodies here.
Who are you the Academy Awards Committee for ScamArtists and Trolls???
"Clever?" NEVER! insipid, cruel, childish, YES! Man, you got your head so
far up your ass it's unbelievable!
> And in case you hadn't noticed, Saint, the "rules" you
> have listed are for a particular newsgroup called alt.cuddle. Perhaps
> this fact escaped your attention.
I didn't list 'em. Supernews did. They are suggestions. Not rules. Idiot.
Ignorance is bliss in the eyes of the computer professionals.
> And they fiercely guard their ignorance.
Speak for yourself, ignoramous!
> There have been no cases of forgery, plagiarism, or copyright
> infringement at all. Not a single one.
Excuse me but I don't take legal advice from known plagiarists! When you
copy my work to another group and I told you not to. That is COPYRIGHT
INFRINGEMENT, you stupid dullard! And when you copy my work and call it your
own, as in your "angel scam" post that is INFRINGEMENT and PLAGIARISM, you
lying sack of dung!
And when you use my e-mail addy without telling me, that is FORGERY. And
when you use my electronic signature to forge a document, that is a CRIME.
So yes as you so blythley put it: "They may be crimes, but
you'll never get a conviction."
So what? As long as you two know you are nothing but filthy criminals. O.J.
keeps saying he's innocent. He was even let off. But he'll pay in other
ways...
> You'll never even manage to swear out
> a complaint about it - the authorities have enough to do with real
> crimes, and can't waste their time helping little babies get back at
> their friends.
The only little baby here, Baruch, is yourself. Little rug-rat. crawling
along in his own shitty diaper whining about being called a criminal, when
all the time committing one crime after another! So that's our s"justice"
system, don't I know it! The criminals get away with every crime. While the
innocent suffer. But God knows what you are doing, Baruch. And YOU know it.
So suffer with it, you cry-baby! You're the one who moaned about me sticking
it to you about being ill and shit! I never said one thing about it! You are
an idiot, man! You don't even know what you are saying anymore! But I
noticed this. In order to get away from the crime of stealing my address,
Boggle changed his to the present form adding >> after it!! And you changed
yours too! Skirting the law may not be a crime. But your intent is to
destroy and confuse.Which is nothing more than an admission of guilt! Now,
everyone knows you two are a couple of dyed in the wool criminals in cyber
sapce, two characters with an obsession and PUBLIC committment to
destruction of another soul by your own admissions...that's all I want. For
you to condemn yourselves out of your own mouths, change my addy so I can
kill-file it and keep delivering your highly "spiritual" curses and
obnoxious insults, thereby proving exactly what sort of scam artists you two
are! And worse doing to yourselves what I did to myself...making it so not
one person will ever take you seriously here!
> No, a crime hasn't been committed.
I said to my mind you are criminals. And you just admitted it doesn't
matter, because even if you are, no one will stop you! So to my mind and the
public eye, you are just a criminals who happens at this point to be able to
get away with murder. You've already admitted to stealing. I've seen you
lie, as have others, and you are now just cheating the system, manipulating
it to your own cause. But it's your INTENT that should frighten you. Not me.
because you are stacking up a whopping karmic debt that believe me, when you
see things through my eyes on your review day, you will HAVE to balance out.
So welcome to HELL. Abandon all Hope Ye Who Enter Herein.
> Right - and you've also failed to bring evidence,
Wrong. I brought evidence to bear to Supernews about Boggle's activities and
they are investigating it. What happens to Boggle will be up to them. But
they don't need to have him or you "commit a crime" to boot you off their
server. All they need is for the real David St. Albans to tell them you two
are a couple of forgers. The laws don't apply to cyber-space. So they can
kick you out quick as you please...without just cause. So keep it up.
Cybercrime doesn't pay much.
> Boggle, don't you go forging checks now. That *is* a crime, and a
> serious one at that.
Yeah, Baruch, you ought to know! How many have you forged? How many scams
have you passed off on people? You seem so adept at pointing scams out to
others...and then producing them! Now it's threats of producing "angel
scams" under my name! Biy, you must not only be mad, you must be HELLA-MAD!
Big deal. People of quality will see behind your awful, ugly little masks!
You aren't interested in either angels or spirit. You are interested in
vendetta, anger and hatred. Everybody you meet simply isn't good enough to
be your friend, or to be alive in your world! You are a self-hating Jew and
a self-hating man. That's all alcoholism is, you know, self-destruction. And
you are doing it now! You weren't healed. You've been saved alive to
straighten yourself out, but have managed to keep digging your own grave! So
have at. Be a criminal. Steal, lie, cheat, unnerve, insult, berate, condemn.
Soon enough you'll have a REAL excuse to drink yourself back into oblivion.
And maybe this time God will simply welcome you HOME. Because evidently you
are not happy HERE. I have never, in my life met such an officious, pompous
self-defeating bloated toad! I gave you all the friendship I had to muster!
And you shit on it! Wow! How proud you must be!
> Oh, BTW. I decided to take your handle, just for fun. See what I
> mean?
Your fun is my misery. You have committed an awesome amount of crimes
against me in the past few weeks. Ask God, Baruch, if you even know who God
is. You said yourself you "Had to stop for your own good!" But you don't
have your own good at heart, do you? Nor do you have mine. That was all lies
as well. You are a self-destructive meat-puppet. You've utterly revelaed
yourself to me personally, man. I am done with you. You can't get a handle
on what freindship means, or committment, or responsibility. You are losing
on all fronts and yet, to top it all off, you sit upon your self-made
shit-hill and crow about how you are the KING! Wear the crown with puffed up
pride, toad-boy! When the rain comse your shit hill will pool away to the
sweage you made it out of.
>And you don't even have an actual e-mail address, so you can't
> even accuse me of forging anything.
Boy you love to make excuses! You stole my NAME you stupid wretch! I made up
a name so I could post here. You stole it. So you could try to hurt me. What
on God's green earth is WRONG with YOU??? Jesus Christ! Get some damned
therapy before you crack!
> Besides, I made up a different
> one, just so you wouldn't think I was trying to be you.
What rationalizations! Incredible! You are wrecked as a human being, man.
Totally worthless. Irreedemable. Welcome to the Hell you made. Keep it up.
You can "hose" me anytime. But what you cannot do is forgive YOURSELF for
having done so. You have become an ultimate hypocrite. So do your worst. I
am no longer interested...except to see the full and utter disintegration of
a once interesting personality. YOURS.
Saint Albans
angelicusrex
sorts of interesting rationalizations why everything they have done is all
right. Their destructive behavior has ultimate meaning to them. They were
slaying evil dragons, putting down demons...Then usually they put a gun in
their mouths.
Because believe me. A vendetta against me, David St. Albans, is NOT what's
bothering this phony guru or mad scientist or whatever he thinks he is this
morning! Codes have nothing to do with it. The guy is disintegrating
emotionally and putrefying on-line in front of me!
I actually respected his words once. Now I see that behind them was a
vacuous void of seething chaos. It was well managed. It made him outwardly
appear interesting, even knowledgeable. Then as I saw further, his
"knowledge" was not verifiable, not about the Bible or history, not about
Judaism or the Hebrew language. He began to appear hollow to me at that
moment. And he caught on that I had caught on to him! Now I see an empty,
cracked cup. Useless to others for anything but an outwardly pleasant
looking receptacle, but functionally worthless.
He claims he is "not through with me yet." I think he means he is not
through obsessing and cracking up. Exactly what he swore was happening to me
a few short weeks ago. But that's obsession for you. When you are empty
inside, you feel the need to fill yourself with the worthwhile contents of
another life. This is the actual literal cause of vampirism, psychic or
otherwise. One's own evil causes one to want to suck the marrow of life out
of those who seem to have something worthwhile. Because one is an empty
vessel.
I caution Baruch on the road he has chosen. Oh, yes. He has made me angry
enough to insult him. On numerous occasions. But my intent was only to be
his friend. I would have been anyone's friend here who offered me the hand
of friendship. He did. Then he abused it. Now he wants to blame me for his
unsavory behavior? His anger was eating him up long before I ever got here.
He is older than me. Something turned him into the self-hating wretch he has
finally shown himself to be. It wasn't me. He thinks that I haven;t suffered
enough? Is that his prerogative to judge me in that way? Does he know
anything of my life or what I've been through? No. He is self-centered. he
is self-consumed. But like a tornado of rage their is an empty space at the
center of his twisting soul. As this vortex of emptiness gains momentum, he
hopes to destroy all those who make him feel bad about himself. He keeps
rationalizing how he is not a criminal, not a plagiarist, not an insulting
monster, not a two-faced fair weather friend, not a nearly violent man
filled with raging impotence which causes him to not be able to find any
pleasant human company! No, it is all David St. Alban's fault!
Tune in next time, same bat time, same bat channel, to see if Batty Baruch
will either come to his senses and wake up to his weird fall, or will he be
as blind as that proverbial nightflying beastie and whack his poor noggin
some more on the brick wall of life, until it shatters?
Saint
Meanwhile, he can take his codes, forgeries, plagiarisms and his phony
e-mails and shove them wherever in his life, the sun don't shine. Which I
daresay may be any place within his physical vicinity! I got to know this
guy a bit. He's like that kid in the Peanuts cartoon with the rain-cloud
over his head 24-7! poor bastard.
"angelicusrex" <bar...@mad.scientist.com> wrote in message
news:da321234.02120...@posting.google.com...
the Angels and Saint David
The Allbuns Stupidity score now stands at 25
for having delusions, and rationalizing.
Love,
Saint David The Beloved Human
angelicusrex
person to "make a diagnosis" about another's psychological health is, to
this person's mind, "impossible." Because I don't know him. Or do I? He
seems to say on one had that I do know him. On the other I don't know him
and on another that he wants me to get to know him! I don't know him
personally, nor would I care to. But I do know the indications of a
debilitating obsessive/compulsive behavior when I see it. I also know that
he has a sense of what he calls "well earned anger." That he feels the need
to get out by posing as me, stealing my name, creating more and more
sock-puppets in order to "get his message through" to me.
His message: "I am angry and I cannot live without trying to screw with
another human being. I have no life other than this right now." It is a
disintegration of personality. This man, knowing the little I do know about
him, has been violently angry for years and years. Such unmanaged anger,
often repressed, is what causes drinking and drug problems, violent
outbursts and an inability to relate to others. One need not be a
psychologist to see this in action among many human beings today. No one
"made him mad" as he so often exclaims. He has been mad and is expressing
anger that is decades old.
Much of his anger is directed at those he considers to be "charlatans and
scam-artists." Yet his own propensity it to act exactly like those he hates.
Answer: He hates them so much because he either has had to be one in the
past to "survive." Or he was badly hurt or saw someone badly hurt by someone
he took to be a scam-artist. Or both!Now he is vindictively aggressive in
his campaign to turn everyone away from these "bad people." So much so that
he simply turns everyone he doesn't like or who won't listen to him, into a
"scam-artist" so he can "expose them" and hate them without guilt!
If and when he wakes up to the bald truth of what he is doing here, scamming
others. He will begin to feel that he himself is the "bad guy." This often
brings on a suicidal depression. It is called an "imposter syndrome." When a
person doesn't know who they are because they've been pretending to be
someone else for so long. This is, believe it or not, a very strong
influence in suicidal behavior among males in their latter years.
This person in my humble, non-medical opinion does still need to seek
therapeutic help for this rage.
Read more:
<angeli...@baruch-menahem.com> wrote in message
news:4tj3vu06p7d936ivd...@4ax.com...
> Hello, Saint:
> |>
> You know, Saint, you're still making the psychological diagnoses
> without ever having met me. It's simply impossible, and no competent
> psychologist or psychiatrist would dare make such a diagnosis. But
> this is just your foolish way of calling me names and trying to
> legitimize what you are doing.
But of course he is entirely within his rights to call other people names,
without having made a psychological diagnoses. He is also well within his
right to carry a grudge, to make false accusations, to lie, steal cheat,
plagiarize other people's work and call them scam-artists.
Denial evidently is a great big river in Chicago where this person drowns
himself daily!
>
> I am no more "insane" than you are - and considerably more sane, in
> fact.
Most insanse people believe themselves to be totally sane and of course
"saner than most." This is another way to rationalize away their strange
behaviors.
> I keep telling you
> to find a grownup to read it to you.
An example of how it is certainly O.K. for him to call another person a
child, unable to read or understand him. He of course makes a "diagnoses"
here without "knowing me." It is pretty simple to see from reading my posts
that I am fully competent at reading and understanding. Educational tests
have given me the highest marks for reading comprehension. So this is his
way of "belittling" me. This is what I mean by INVALIDATION. Because I have
made a valid and sound judgement, not on his capabilities as an intellect,
but rather on his strange and destructive behavior. I am invalidated by his
belittling remarks.
A competent psychologist would indeed make a diagnosis in a case like this,
even if it were purely specualtive. As a scientist, they would simply change
their opinion IF they perhaps sat for years with this person in a therapy
situation or somehow found out that the personality he portrays here is not
really his own. But as a speculation based on this behavior, attitude and
wild need to be "sane" in the face of insane, obsessive behavior and
rage...I think I would let my "diagnosis" stand. However I am no medical
doctor. I am a layman with some psychological background and experience. So
my opinion is not medical at all. It is simply experiential. It is not a
diagnosis so much as a warning of impending fracture.
> I am slaying no dragons nor demons. All I am doing is standing up to
> one single bully, a human being who insists on trying to control a
> newsgroup with threats, intimidation, lies, rationalizations, and
> whining.
Interesting how I am a "bully." Yet he is the one who is trying to
"intimidate" me with threats, lies and rationalizations. Did I steal his
name? Did I forge documents or signatures of other people in order to breed
confusion here? Did I plagiarize materials in order to show everyone how
"bad and what a scam-artist" this man is? Did I ever tell this man he ought
to be ashamed of his behavior on this NG before this flame war started? The
answers are all no. And of course the important point here is this: This
individual has stood on the principle for some three years now, that fire
ought not to be fought with fire. That insults, threats and intimidations
showed a low moral character and not only that, nearly proved that the
person involved in such activites were themselves, disintegrating, falling
apart. He has accused me of this on several occassions. Yet he is unable to
see that his own behvior is exactly now that of the persons he used to
berate!
His berating process has taken place in two forms. First he was "better"
than everyone because he was well mannered and polite and thought out his
arguments. Now he is "better" than everyone because he is argumentative,
over-emotional, enraged, ill-tempered and apt to steal, lie and cheat
because he "thinks" this is rationally driven behavior.
He is literally "hoodwinking" himself. Acting like two completely separate
individuals, both of whom are in their rights to act thus! It is my belief
he has actually created several other personalities here. And has done so in
the past. He is a person who does not any longer have his "own personality."
He simply makes them up as he goes. At the bottom of each is, again, a void
of chaotic emotions and a vacuous disregard of other people's emotions. This
is nearly a clinical description of psychosis.
> Anything you think might work, you feel free to try.
Here he reiterates what I said to him in an earlier post. One interesting
aspect of being on this NG is the way so many personality-less people want
to be ME! I don't really understand it. Why a person wants to be or act as
the very object of their upset! He claimed it was an "object lesson."
Perhaps then I am nothing more than an "object" to him one to be taught a
"lesson." That lesson of course being to show me how violently aggressive he
can be. Which he has exposed in no less than three documents in one day!
As I said, this is an interesting process to watch.
>Just
> standing up to one human bully, an ineffectual one at that, but one
> who has finally pissed me off.
Why does he feel the need to "stand up to an ineffectual bully?" An
ineffectual bully, by its nature would be a non-bully. He might be a
laughing stock, like watching a mouse trying to bully an elephant! But he
would pose no threat nor create anger. Only an effectual bully could pose a
threat or make one angry. It is also intersting to note that he has once
again only reiterated several things I have said to people here in the past,
using terms like bully, threat, being "pissed off." etc. All of these things
he has "called me on" or called me to task for in the past are now
absolutely O.K. for him to do. He cannot see his propensity for masking his
own already well delineated short-comings. In order to make it all right for
him to act badly, he must reverse our roles. I was once the one who felt
victimized and berated and bullied. I told him as much. Now in order to
victimize, berate and bully me, I must become, to his mind, the real threat,
the real bully, the real intimidator. He has spun around 180 degrees in his
personality. But cannot see it. And he has accused people of doing exactly
the same things and of being spiritually unadept because of it. Yet not one
of his old definitions now apply to his own behaviors.
You see what NG flame wars can do to the mind?!
Let's see what else we can pick up here...
>... I am an *angry* human being because I've had a bellyful of
> your bullshit and lies, and now I'm going to bitch-slap you around.
He just has had a belly full and now he is going to be violent. This
apparently is o.k. for him, but again, was not o.k. for me when I felt that
way!
> But I will not kill any dragons, nor demons, nor human beings. If I
> had any inkling that I was even close to doing someone physical
> injury, I would immediately stop.
Interesting self-diagnosis. Yet if another person says to him, "Stop
slapping me around like a "bitch!" I think you are on the edge of a bad
fall..." He is totally unable to hear it. So he is saying here that until he
is able to see himself objectively (which for most of us is very rare!) he
will continue to do as he pleases, simply because it pleases him.
> I am not out to do anyone harm.
And yet he just said he would harm me. "Bitch-slapping" is a fairly
deragotory term against the feminine (loving, compassion, nurturing, etc.)
and is used by BULLIES to prove their MANHOOD, usually on the mean streets
or in prisons. They do this because they feel their manhood is threatened by
how other people will view them. So they make another man out to be a
"bitch" ( a woman, in essence...and how low is that LOL!) and they often do
slap them or strike them in order to show their superiority. This shows how
they feel about women and men they do not respect in general, who often
become their "bitch." This of course is a servile, sexual position in the
heirarchy of their tough little world. But to call a woman a bitch is bad
enough. It means they think of women as nothing but servants to their sexual
aggression.
Wow.
> But I am not going to take your abuse any longer, Saint. You will
> never abuse me here again, without my responding to it in kind.
So first, use an abusive term like "bitch-slap you around" then say it is
because he was abused by me!
I see, and it appears that my "abuse" was to justly accuse this fellow of
abusing me! This is a person who tried to make me ashamed for telling others
to beware of a con-man...(Boggle, who I am beginning to think might just be
Baruch!) He then tried to make me look like a con-man myself by taking my
words and showing everyone how "easy it was for him to be a con-man." This
is pretty warped, if you ask me. Again, I stole nothing from this man.
Though he did recently lie and accuse me of stealing my whole angel book,
directly from him. Painting a nice scenario of a fantasy life I supposedly
had with him in Chicago. He considers that stealing a person's style is not
stealing. He says using someone elses name in a signature on a posting is
not forgery. He claims that spamming others under an assumed name which he
stole, is not a cyber-crime. He denies everything he does under the auspices
of his righteous indignation at being "abused." However at what point did I
abuse him??? He never mentions it. He did mention that I supposedly, in his
opinion, abused someone else named Raine. Why bring her up? If my abuse was
against him specifically? It seems I abused him. This Raine person, the
"entire NG." And spread bullshit and lies. He brings no evidence at all of
this. But he contends that because I accused him of obvious plagiarism, that
I need to bring evidence here to prove it!
The pattern here for him is well established. He can do as he pleases,
change his personas, insult, lie, cheat, steal, act violently aggresive in a
verbal manner, all those things he accused others of when he was the
"Well-mannered" and erudite Baruch of last year...and he can do it without
compunction. because he has a righteous cause. To eradicate sock-puppets,
injustice, cheating, lying, stealing, insulting and palgiarism...not in
society at large...but just by ME! Of course anyone else doing these these
things is also O.K. by him, unless it is ME. Only I alone must be stopped!
LOL!
Well, I must say, I had the same inclination a year ago. I felt the same as
he does now. I felt fighting fire with fire was necessary. I felt dishing
out repugnant insults would finally destroy the bullies. Now I have come to
the conclusion that I was lying to myself. That I had some inner rage I
needed to express. I was mad at other things. Because indeed these "bullies"
here were ineffectual and mostly insane. No one would ever make them stop.
They would never stop themselves either. In fact. I was correct. They have
not stopped, will never stop, and instead are joined by others of like mind.
My repugnant behavior became repugnant to myself. So I stopped it. This does
not mean I never get mad. But at least now I know my anger is my own. I
claim it. I have stated here that I was bullied badly as a child. I know it.
Does this make bullying a "good thing?" To other bullies it does. When I
make comments like that, they come out and say what a "cry-baby whiner" I
am. How I am "looking for sympathy!" Well, you bet I am! Why not? Would we
surround ourselves purposely with unsympathetic bullies and people who could
care less about us, or even seek to destroy us if we are reasonably healthy
minded people? Some do. Because they are unhealthy and self-destructive.
Baruchs friends here now include the few people left that have no other job
in life but to curse me daily! The self-destructive surround themselves with
the destructive and fancy themselves impervious to destruction.
I chose and do choose another path. But if anyone thinks then that I will
not expose bullying and crimes, then they are wrong. Because I have a strong
committment to aiding SOCIETY at large in becoming a stronger, more
pro-active entity so we can ALL better ourselves. I have no vendettas
against single people any longer. I need no sock-puppets. I am not afraid to
give out my addresses to those who seek it and are decent people. I have
always extended the hand of friendship to those who seek peace and
friendship. That is how I truly am inside. I am not a seething pot full of
ire and disturbing visions. I am happy to be me. I dont need to take out my
hatred of injustice in some violent manner any longer. Baruch would do well
to understand this.
>...a vendetta against you isn't anything that *bothers* me. I find
> it stimulating, refreshing, and relieving after trying for so long to
> overlook your arrogant boorishness.
So a vendetta itself is alarmingly "refreshing!" Perhaps he does not know
what the definition of the word vendetta is?
> You've been "seeing" this "vacuous void of seething chaos" ever since
> I knew you.
This is absolutely not true. This man was once a friend and ally to me. I
saw nothing vacuous about him. And I felt that his words had deep
significance. Only very recently has he put the lie to my feelings and shown
me what he really is all about. This post is one minor example. A long
diatribe of denial and rationalization. Would you like to know how he really
"hurt me?" He did it by becoming something warped and evil and cruel...I was
tricked into thinking he actually was a nice guy. he assuaged my doubts.
Manufactured a cultured persona to make himself seem reasonable, well
educated and rational. Then he exploded it. I was devestated by this. So
others have been as well. My heart is heavy because I see what I thought was
a good man, go bad. But, I need to remind myself. He didn't go bad. He was
most likely, always this bad. He just never had an outlet before.
> You have *always* accused me of it, no matter what. When
> I spoke nicely to you, you accused me of *hiding* it behind my nice
> words.
And apparently I was correct. However again this is an out of context
statement. When he was insulting me some moths ago and hiding the insults as
he said, "veiled within a well mannered response" I ferretted out his
tendency to put insults inside his well-meaning language. I had always
wondered why he insisted on manners. Now I am convinced it was to hide the
bloody dagger beneath robes of honor.
> Now that I freely insult you,...What a fucking moron you are."
How does his being freely insulting make someone else a moron? I think I
would have been a moron had I actually totally believed in his well-meaning
words. (And I think he knows this. Luckily I cannot be tricked further. I
will never respect him again or trust him.) I knew something lurked behind
them. He told me enough about his life that I began to grasp his
misanthropic attitudes. Now with all this talk of "fucking" and insulting
and "bitch-slapping" well, it become apparent that the robes of honor were
stained long ago with the filth and crust of crudity and dishonor. So call
me a moron. It does not hurt me. Because in a sense, I was right all along.
The manners were an affectation.
Now I think this is enough for one day. I see that in his urgency to "stop
harassing me for his own good" he has made three other posts under my name.
So as we can see, there is little here to speculate upon any longer. A
person who finds vendetta and violence "refreshing" for whatever reasons, is
simply not someone is a good frame of mind. And he calls me grumpy!
I've been watching Stephen Spielberg's"Taken" and the narrator had a very
good understanding of this whole process. She said, and I paraphrase
here...That the reason people become the schoolyard bully is they know, if
they are the bully, then no one can bully them. If they are the monster, no
monster can jump out from behind a tree and get them. They become the
monster because they are afraid.
Sad, huh?
Essentially I have been saying this here for years. But I had never heard it
put so succinctly before.
Have a nice day! :-)
Saint
angelicusrex
none of us need to have any concern about shadowy identity thieves who
cannot use their own real names. Nor should we kow-tow to those who rape,
murder and violate and then want to be accepted as "sensitive, caring
persons."
There is one reason you do all this, "Baruch." You never did reveal your
real name to me. Because you knew what you were going to reveal would be
hideous and maybe worth me suing you over. You were manipulating me. And you
are manipulating this group. You found someone who spoke about angels. Who
did something you could not do. And now you are out to "expose him." To who?
To sock-puppets and talentless hacks? To the two or three misanthropes who
come here once a month to do damage to someone? Do you really and sincerely
think you are doing anything but banging your head against a wall of other
empty heads?
I am beginning to wonder if you are in denial at all. Maybe you are just one
more manipulative psychotic? You sure act like one.
Further. I will NEVER see things your way. That would mean trusting you.
Trusting who? A person who refuses to share their real name and address is
no friend. You are nothing to me now and never will be again, just an
interesting space-case.
Saint
angelicusrex
Baruch bemoans: > Strunk and White discourage the use of the passive voice
in writing.
> I thought you knew how to write?
Professional Writers know how to bend and break the rules. Baruch may follow
Strunk and White the rest of his life. As long as he plagiarizes, he is only
breaking the law. Not breaking writing rules. Picasso knew how to bend the
rules of art. He did not need to follow Michaleangelo's rules, or DaVinci's,
or anyone elses. He was his own man. I am my own man. I know how to write.
Baruch knows how to lie. I know how to originate. Baruch knows how to
plagiarize. Simple as that. As long as he keeps it up and keeps justifying
it to himself, my diagnosis about him remains justified.
> No, Saint, you don't know me.
Or do I?
> If you thought you could silence me...
How very paranoiac!
> You don't know me. You don't know anyone on this newsgroup, unless
> you've met them and spent quality time with them.
Quality time! What an interesting idea!!! Sort of an oxymoron for this group
though.
> All you know is
> what I write. Stupid.
Ah, there's that insult that he was going to "have to stop for his own
good..." again! Is there some other word he could use??? This one is getting
boring.
> |>So a vendetta itself is alarmingly "refreshing!"
It is alarming to me that this man "Baruch" finds hatred and vengeance
"refreshing." You'll note I quoted the word refreshing from his awful text.
The other words are mine. Apparently this man hasn't read either Strunk and
White, nor Little, Brown, nor anything else about citing, quotations and
paraphrasing. And he asks whether I know how to write!? The audacity! Does
he know how to do anything but blow hot air?
LOL!
The rest is prelude to insanity and duly snipped. <snip>
Saint
angelicusrex
> Ah, but you are no Picasso, no Michelangelo (you spelled it wrong), no
> DaVinci.
Right. As I said. I am my own man. And sometimes my fingers slip on the
keyboard. At least I don;t steal Michelangelo's art and sign my name to it.
> If I introduce a new word (e.g., "ad hominem"), it will appear
> in your next post.
I'm afraid Ad Hominem is not your word. It is a part of English and Latin
language. It means "Arguing against the man." Which is all you ever do.
People have actually discussed ad hominem arguments here years before you
ever arrived. In fact I used it here years before you ever arrived. And I
will use it again. Look it up in the archives. I'm sure you have time.
> You call me a plagiarist, but you are the worst
> offender of them all.
Prove that. I have never lifted anyone's work. Not ever.
> Ah, yes, your diagnosis. You are holding yourself out to be, among
> other things, God Almighty, Picasso, Michelangelo, DaVinci (are you
> sure that's not DeVito?),
I said I was MY OWN MAN as those persons were THEIR OWN MEN. They were
individuals, as am I.
I cannot recall ever saying I was "God Almighty." I do recall saying Baruch
is a thief. My diagnosis, as I said in a previous post, is not medical in
nature but rather experiential. And this post was not written on paper. It
is as valueless as the electrons that go to make it appear before you. It is
an electronic illusion, a magic trick. But Baruch's writings are all just
parlor tricks as well.
> *Anyone* who knows me would realize that doing so was only waving a
> red flag in front of a bull,
He said it, not me! He's a bull. And full of bull waste as well. But I knew
that. And Bull Fighters love to wave red capes in front of bulls.
> just asking for trouble.
I see no trouble. Just a troubled soul. What is interesting is he is acting
exactly how I used to when I first came here. Indignant, threatened,
insultive. It didn't work for me. it never works to try and silence bullies
with bullying. Yes, I was a bully for awhile. But things change. I haven't
"intimidated" anyone for a long while. I get along with most everyone on
this NG who actually speaks back as a normal human being. (Pretend gods and
prophets who do nothing but spam the group with poetry and their
half-fleshed out theories do not count.)
> I respond to a
> large number of things, various forms of persuasion, but I do *not*
> respond well to threats or intimidation.
Me neither. As he well knows. No one's threats have ever amounted to a hill
of beans here anyway. Mine were made in anger to people who threatened me.
But I do not recall ever threatening this man with intimidation or violence,
except when he started calling my friends stupid names. That's because I was
angry. Which he claimed was WRONG. But it seems, only wrong for me. he get's
to be angry at will...or at me...or anyone else he doesn't like! LOL!
This guy is no saint, no matter what he tends to believe or to write about
himself. Just as I am no saint. Except in that I seek God and seek
reconnection with God. A name doesn't make a person a thing. If I was named
Greg Bear, I would not be a bear. If I was named Buffalo Bill, I wouldn't be
a buffalo. I am named Saint Albans. I am not Saint Albans. I shorten it to
saint to save bandwidth, not to intimidate unsaintly folks! As I said, I
always liked the Roger Moore character on TV called the Saint. The whole
thing was see, he wasn't a saint, he was a thief! But he robbed from the
rich and gave to the poor. Whereas Baruch robs from the poor and gives to
himself. But the character of the Saint was a cool guy. Suave,
sophisticated, witty, urbane, and always one step ahead of the bad guys.
Would that I could be that by virtue of a name. But no, I am not even that.
I know it. So everyone shouting at me that I am no saint are simply being
rather redundant.
> That just sets me off, makes
> me very, very angry, and wholly unreasonable.
Good. because I am trying to make him very, very angry and show just how
unreasonable he really is.
So far, it's working. And I haven't even had to call him "stupid!"
Saint
angelicusrex
A thief named Baruch speaks his ill will into the air with hot, stinking
breath.
> You would be incapable of producing anything that would ever pass as a
> work by Michelangelo, no matter how long you worked at it. You are a
> cartoonist, not a painter.
Evidently you haven't seen my art gallery. I'm perfectly capable of
producing a Michaelangelo or a Picasso or a DaVinci. In fact I have been
doing competent copies for many, many years (see my Retablos at my gallery!)
What I said is: "that at least I don't put my name to them and call them
mine." So of course, Baruch, seeking to act all righteous, decides it's o.k.
for him to steal because *I'm not an artist!* there's some warped logic for
you!
Surf over to www.saintalbansstudio.com and see examples of the ASTOUNDING
array of work I do. Oh yes, I paint. I engrave ivory, I cartoon, I tattoo, I
do promotional packaging, t-shirts, graphic art, book and magazine
illustrations, copies of famous artwork (not forgeries, but quality copies)
including Heironymos Bosch, and Albrecht Durer. (You can see an example of a
copy of his St. Michael Battling the Devil on an entire elephant tusk I did
back in the 80's. I've done western costuming, business cards, signs,
theatrical props and backdrops, murals for the New Mexico Museum of Natural
History, miniatures, original paintings of all descriptions in the Science
Fiction Fantasy and Horror fields. I've been on televison and music videos,
I've written books and newspaper stories, magazine articles and poetry.
because of this poor old Baruch is jealous. And in his jealousy he needs to
be ME! All you have to do is scan my site briefly to see what I am capable
of. I don't need to brag like this jack-ass Baruch brags! he once told me
that "If I wrote a book it would be a lot better than anything you've
written!" Now is that hay-wire logic or what? He has written no book, so
therefore the one he may write, or may NEVER write (more likely! Did you
know thirty percent of the populous claims they want to write books, and 2
percent ever do it!) is somehow going to be better than the one of mine that
he never read! How exactly does that work???
> I am perfectly capable of creating
> my own turds, without having to steal any of yours.
Hahahhahhahahahhahahahahahhahahahahaha! So now he's a creator of shit!? What
a guy! He determines other people's work is shit. Then he plagiarizes it.
Puts his name on it and packages it as his Original Baruch Shit! Oh, my
sides ache!
> Yes, this is true. However, you are constantly adding new words to
> your posts, immediately after I introduce them.
And I reiterate. I and others here were using the word ad hominem long
before this turd-creating schmuck ever showed his false polite persona on
this NG. LOL! In fact I used it on him several posts ago when I was showing
his initial fallacious arguments! So really, he just reintroduced the word I
introduced previously. Evidently he thinks that whomever is reading these
posts, can't read! They evidently can't figure things out for themselves.
They need Daddy's help. Daddy is going to make the evil St. Albans man go
away and make it all better! That mean old St. Albans man is going to be
NICE to everyone here or else! That's what Daddy Baruch swears! And in his
quest to do this he will use every crooked device, scheme, backhanded
insult, and con that he can think of! Every word game, every
rationalization! Evidently he thinks that this is somehow making ME look
bad! LOL! Let me tell you. Nerd Gerl swore the same thing. She all gone now,
Daddy! Art Copeland swore it as well. he also swore he would KILL me! He all
gone now too, Daddy! Nooresnsia swore she would destroy me! No more
Noorensia! So old Daddy Baruch the turd-burgalar can do his worst! I'll
still be here after they sew him up into a wet canvas sack in a rubber room.
This guy is stupid if he thinks that all his stupid slandering and word
twisting is doing more than making him look a total and complete idiot.
Meanwhile the really stupid people still rule this old roost.
And so it goes...
Saint Albans
Elohim
This Is More Evidence That You Have No Original Ideas Of Your Own.
Not Only Are You A Plagiarist, But You Are Also A Copy Artist.
[Definition Plagiarist: (1) Someone who uses another person's words or ideas
is they were his own (2) Saint David Albans PuddleOfShit]
Copy Cat - Copy Cat
Lying Cheating Stealing Rat
BTW, Your Artwork Is An Embarrassment To The Industry. Please Read The Back Of
The Crayon Box For Instructions.
angelicusrex <ange...@nospam.com> wrote in article
<at5nkj$111mpc$1...@ID-168098.news.dfncis.de>...
Saint David
First of all this sneak-thief stole the name Elohim. So who would
listen to a sneak-thief?
> Real Artists Don't Copy Other People's Work.
Are you an artist? If so then you would know that many artists start
their careers by copying other artist's works. The greatest artists,
including DaVinci and Michaelangelo, worked in the studios of artist
teachers COPYING THEIR TECHNIQUES. The difference between a real
artist and a fraud is real artists don't say it is their work. They
say it is a copy. If you had the brains and or money to go to Europe
you would find thousands of competent artists copying famous works of
art. As it is you are a nobody and your opinion does not matter. Of
ocurse you would also need brains and money to read a book on Art or
go to school to study art history.
>
> This Is More Evidence That You Have No Original Ideas Of Your Own.
This is not evidence of anything. My web site shows that I have a lot
of original work and a few copies. The copies show competentcy and a
good eye. The originals show creativity and flair. What are you
showing? How to steal from the Angels? Big deal. You are nothing.
>
> Not Only Are You A Plagiarist, But You Are Also A Copy Artist.
Again, you cannot accuse me of plagiarsim, since it is YOU who
plagiarized me. And there is nothing wrong with being a Copy Artist.
Do you think all the paintings you see, like those in the Harry potter
movies, are ORIGINALS? You pompous little twit! All artists begin by
copying other artist's work. And there is a HUGE market for copies of
famous works. BTW did you know that the copyright law states it is
only an infringement and a forgery if #1. The copyist has direct
access to the ORIGINAL and seeks to copy said original init's exact
form. And that #2. The copyist tries to pass the work off as original
under the other artist's name? Copying is a legitimate art technique.
And my own work has been copied by other artists. My original tattoo
designs in fact were MEANT to be copied! Boy, stick to what you know.
>
> [Definition Plagiarist: (1) Someone who uses another person's words or ideas
> is they were his own [This is not a ny definition. This is LIBEL.] (2) Saint David Albans PuddleOfShit] (and this is childishness!)
Yes, so whoever you are, stop plagiarizing. Stop stealing sigs. Stop
being a pompous ass.
>
> Copy Cat - Copy Cat
> Lying Cheating Stealing Rat
Oh, my God. Is this as good as you got? You sound like a petulant
little eight year old! get a life, little boy.
>
> BTW, Your Artwork Is An Embarrassment To The Industry. Please Read The Back Of
> The Crayon Box For Instructions.
As if you would know. As if you are in the industry. It is obvious
from this post you don't know what plagiarism is, what consitutes art,
fraud, copies, or anything else. Do you think I would have been stupid
enough to include the word COPIES in my last post if I thought for one
minute there was anything illegitmate about it? You are a dunce. Did
you have your mommy write your post for you? LEarn how to read and
then learn how to use crayons. Start by tracing something simple. You
couldn't handle a Michaelangelo. Read the words below again, you silly
little child. Now, either I can produce a Michaelangelo or I cannot. I
say I can. I say you people can't produce a fart after eating a can of
beans! Where's your work? Where's your original works of art or
writing? Nowhere. You are worthless, so you seek to make me worthless
to others. But you are nothing but a thief and a liar. Not only that
but you seem to be as dense as a sack of lead pellets!
> > Evidently you haven't seen my art gallery. I'm perfectly capable of
> > producing a Michaelangelo or a Picasso or a DaVinci. In fact I have been
> > doing competent copies for many, many years (see my Retablos at my gallery!)
> >
> > What I said is: "that at least I don't put my name to them and call them
> > mine."
Get the picture? You Philistine!
Saint Albans (I got your picture hangin' ovah heah!)
whisper...@baruch-menahem.com
|>including DaVinci and Michaelangelo, worked in the studios of artist
Saint, it's Michelangelo. How could you copy one of his paintings, if
you can't even copy the man's name?
|>designs in fact were MEANT to be copied! Boy, stick to what you know.
|>
I suggest you do the same.
|>couldn't handle a Michaelangelo. Read the words below again, you silly
That's Michelangelo.
|>little child. Now, either I can produce a Michaelangelo or I cannot. I
It's *still* Michelangelo.
|>> > producing a Michaelangelo or a Picasso or a DaVinci. In fact I have been
Even now, it's Michelangelo.
|>> > What I said is: "that at least I don't put my name to them and call them
|>> > mine."
|>
Well, I hope you don't try to sign them "Michaelangelo", because
that's now how he spelled his name.
Baruch
Elohim
<d7b5e36e.02121...@posting.google.com>...
> First of all this sneak-thief stole the name Elohim. So who would
> listen to a sneak-thief?
You Listened Retard. Not Only That, You Responded. How Quaint.
> As it is you are a nobody and your opinion does not matter.
If Our Opinion Didn't Matter, You Wouldn't Have Gotten Into Such An Uproar,
You Predictable Prick.
> Of
> ocurse you would also need brains and money to read a book on Art or
> go to school to study art history.
ASSuming That You Have All Three, Why Can't You Correctly Spell "course"?
> This is not evidence of anything. My web site shows that I have a lot
> of original work and a few copies. The copies show competentcy and a
> good eye. The originals show creativity and flair.
You Have The Skill Of A 3rd Grader On Drugs. Your Website Shows Other Artwork
That You Copied And Your Posts Show Your Misspellings.
> there is nothing wrong with being a Copy Artist.
So We All See Now.
> BTW did you know that the copyright law states it is
> only an infringement and a forgery if #1. The copyist has direct
> access to the ORIGINAL and seeks to copy said original init's exact
> form. And that #2. The copyist tries to pass the work off as original
> under the other artist's name?
You Are An Embarrassment To The Legal Community As Well. We Know You Make Up
Names. But You Can Not Make Up Laws Too!
> And my own work has been copied by other artists. My original tattoo
> designs in fact were MEANT to be copied! Boy, stick to what you know.
You Need To Learn How To Draw
> You sound like a petulant
> little eight year old!
We Didn't Mean To Turn You On.
> Do you think I would have been stupid
> enough to include the word COPIES in my last post if I thought for one
> minute there was anything illegitmate about it?
We Think You Are Stupid For Lesser Things, But Yes.
> You are a dunce. Did
> you have your mommy write your post for you?
Do You Have To Copy Barauch's Insults Too?
>Now, either I can produce a Michaelangelo or I cannot.
It Is Painfully And Gut-Wretching Evident That You Cannot.
> I say you people can't produce a fart after eating a can of
> beans!
Buy Your Wife A Cook Book And You Won't Have To Suffer From That Problem Any
More.
> You are worthless, so you seek to make me worthless
> to others. But you are nothing but a thief and a liar. Not only that
> but you seem to be as dense as a sack of lead pellets!
Was It Something We Said?
Just Learn How To Draw. Or Quit. Your Pictures Hurt Our Eyes.
Literally.
angelicusrex
<whisper...@baruch-menahem.com> wrote in
> Saint, it's Michelangelo. How could you copy one of his paintings, if
> you can't even copy the man's name?
It never occurs to this dummy that I'm doing it on purpose.
Spelling is different in different books, Baruch.
I am TAUNTING you. Do you get that?
I'm WASTING YOUR TIME. because really you are just wasting everyone else's
time.
Pablo Michelangelo DaVinci Picasso.
Elohim
>
> <whisper...@baruch-menahem.com> wrote in
>
> > Saint, it's Michelangelo. How could you copy one of his paintings, if
> > you can't even copy the man's name?
>
> It never occurs to this dummy that I'm doing it on purpose.
You Are Lying. There Is No Significance In Misspelling Names. You Are Simply
Stupid.
angelicusrex
> You've never met me. Actually my breath is sweet and pure, except
> when I've been eating lots of garlic. Then it would be best to avoid
> getting too close.
Best to not get to close under any circumstances to this lying sack of human
refuse calling himself by a dozen names this week.
Of course he claims that I did meet him, In Chicago, years ago, where I
stole *Speaking of Angels* from HIM! LOL! So I know all about his hot,
stinking, predatory breath...don't I? And I know him personally, DON'T I!?
According to his own words...or was he lying? So either he's a liar, because
I KNOW he is. Or he's a liar because he SAYS HE IS!
He can't make up his mind about anything.
What little mind he has.
David St. Albans
Elohim
Explosion Will Occur. And We Will Have Peace.
angelicusrex <ange...@nospam.com> wrote in article
<at6fn7$1158i6$1...@ID-168098.news.dfncis.de>...
angelicusrex
<angeli...@baruch-menahem.com> wrote in message
> I have seen what you must laughingly refer to your "art" gallery. You
> are a cartoonist, not an artist.
Then you are blind. I just sold a painting. A copy of an 18th century
retablo, to an art collector from Spain. What have you sold lately? Your
blood?
> You wouldn't even be able to sign
> Michelangelo's name, because you can't spell it correctly. Don't feel
> bad - it's also misspelled on the Art Institute of Chicago - chiseled
> into the cement, spelled wrong. Oh, well.
Well if the Art Institute of Chicago spelled it that way years before you
and I were born, why not follow their lead? Your spelling is no more valid
than anyone else's. Spelling differs in different texts. Prince Vlad Dracula
spelled his own name five different ways! You see in those days, spelling
wasn't "written in stone." But you knew that. You're just nit-picking.
> Just as well, until you learn how to spell their names.
This is nothing but an *extension* of an argument you are having with
yourself. No one cares how I spell his name. But you can be sure, when I do
a Michaelangelo that features his signature, I wouldn't put it on there
anyway. I am not a forger. I am an artist. And your vapid put-downs of my
work are ridiculous. I have seen nowhere any mention of you as either a
spokesman for the Arts or a valid art or literary critic. All you are doing
is testing me. Seeing if you can get me angry. Well, I've got years of work
under my belt that cannot even go on the website because there is too much
of it. Let's see some of yours. Or are you one of those critics that
criticize those who CAN because you are one who CAN'T?
>> When did I ever say it's OK for me to "steal",
Uhm just now!
> I choose my
> handles because I like them. They are free for all to take.
I see, I come up with the name angelicusrex and you say it is free for the
taking? How is that? I made it up. It's my name. I didn't offer it to you. I
came up witht he handle Elohim. I didn't offer it to you.You stole it. Then
you called it *recycling.* Now you rationalize it is free for you to use?
How is that? Man, you really have an overblown ego for a guy who has nothing
to offer the world but hostility thinly glossed over with Mr. Goody
Two-Shoes words of politeness. It's called RESPECT. You demand it from
everyone and never give it to anyone, David. "Raphael!" (Imagine, using an
artists name and he can't even paint!)
You know you haven't done or said an original thing here in a year.
> You can
> even take mine, you know. You could call yourself "Baruch", and
> there's not a thing I could do about it
Sure there is, you could call me a thief every day of my life. And I would
be one. You would be right. Because I would be using your name without your
permission to make fun of you. Just like you are doing to me.
> No one owns a handle. Deal
> with it.
Nice rationalization of an immoral act. At least I don't want to be an idiot
like yourself. Jeez! What a great ego you have, Granma! And I will deal with
it by pointing out to everyone that you are a thief and a liar, everyday.
You asked me for proof. I give it daily.
> I hope you don't engrave ivory.
Well I DO engrave on IVORY, you stupid twerp! What do you know about Ivory
laws? Anything? I was in the business for 13 years! I know them inside and
out. So you call Someone, Anyone. See if they have any legal right to keep
me from doing artwork on legally purchased fossil and antique ivory! LOL!
You do not know whereof you speak.
> AFAIK, that is now illegal, because
> of the dangerously lowered population of elephants.
You dont know anything about the elephant population or the law.
> It's not
> something I'd be proud to admit, if I were you. Might as well tell
> people you club seals and make fur coats out of them, too.
Right...who gives a shit? People who believe that would be idiots, same as
yourself. Believe me I've dealt with them. You knew I did scrimshaw from way
back. You never said a word about it. Now suddenly it's Baruch Lord of the
Elephants! Protector of the Forest! LOL!
> It's ASTOUNDING what passes for art these days, really. But I admit,
> you are a good cartoonist. And on your very worst day, you are a
> better graphic artist than I ever will be.
That's right. And a better artist than you'll ever be. I really don't accept
art critiques from talentless boors who have none of their own work for me
to pick apart. Cartooning by the way is an artform. The sketches of the
great Michelangelo...Know what they were called? CARTOONS. So please, I am
in good company. You are just being a wretched Philistine, like your friend,
Boggle. What passes for art is what I SELL. Too bad you are incapable of
selling your premises here.
> But that's not saying a
> whole hell of a lot, really.
Tell it to Charles Schulz and Scott Adams, Robert Williams and R. Crumb.
Again, I remain in good company.
> I hope you sign them with your own name. That's Hieronymus Bosch.
> And you picked a mighty macabre bunch of artists to forge.
Oh, so now the artist themselves are "macabre?" AND BTW, Bosch spelled
hisname several different ways as well. You are NOT an expert on anything.
We already know that. Whereas I took five years of Art History in school,
pal. Do you know anything about Art History? No? I didn't think so. Albrecht
Durer, macabre? You are so full of shit, Baruch, it's laughable! LOL.
> What happened to the elephant, I wonder? Did he grow a new tusk?
It died, Baruch. Like all animals. I respect the elephant. It died over a
hundred years ago. And I used what was left of the poor creature to produce
a beautiful object de art. Now, go convict the Japanese and Chinese who are
decimating the present herds for their ivory so they can have harder dicks!
I don't need to feel guilty over what I do. I believe in using animals for
our needs and respecting them for it. We could have all the ivory we wanted
from beached whales and culled elephants. In fact the African Parks are
dying because they can no longer sell ivory legally from the herds they are
forced to cull as their parks shrink! So now the gorillas and rhinos and all
African animals are more endangered! I believe in respecting and utilizing
natural resources.Whereas you think abusing other human beings makes you
better than them! Again, you are so full of shit. Now you are going to try
to make people think I kill elephants! What a laugh. As if there is anyone
here who doesn't already hate my guts for no reason, you seek to give them a
reason!
> This does not mean that you have the least bit of talent;
Uhm, you just said I was more talented than you! So why are you going back
on that? Hmmm? I'll tell you why, because Baruch speak with forked tongue!
LOL! You talk out of both sides of your face. You are a double-talker. One
minute it's one thing the next it is another! if you could only see what an
ass you are acting like!
> only that
> you have managed to convince some people with money that you do.
Yeah, sorry I didn't convince poor, pitiful, nearly homeless survivalist
Baruch of my talent! He might have paid me a compliment...oh wait, he did,
then he took it right back!
Does he see his hypocrisy? First I'm no artist. Then I'm a forger, then I am
an elephant killer, then I'm a good graphic artist and cartoonist, but those
things aren't worth a shit! Now I'm a talentless hack that convinced rich
people I had talent! As if these people were somehow, in Baruch's might
OPINION, incapable of thinking for themselves, and were conned by a
talentless man! (Does he really think that is how these people got rich???
Byt being conned out of their money all the time?) Come on, Baruch. You've
gone totally nuts here! You aren't making any sense. You're anger has got
you saying things that make you look foolish.
>
> Here in Chicago we have a 10- or 20-story baseball bat that cost
> $150,000. Someone took the City for a ride on that one. It was put
> up near Madison and DesPlaines streets, in the middle of Skid Row.
> All the alcoholics dying of their disease could look at it and know
> that the City was not neglecting the arts. Maybe neglecting the
> alcoholics, but who cares about them anyway?
Well, we know you wouldn't piss on their faces if their teeth were on fire!
LOL! You misanthropic nutbar! What does a baseball bat have to do with
shelters? Museums and cities buy art. That goes to artists. Artists are
people too. If they have pocket money, they usually give it to people in
need. Artists are very charitable. Someone needs to buy the ART so the
homeless will have someone else walking around with some change in their
pockets! What do you expect, for everyone to be dirt poor??? Go work in a
shelter and thank God someone is helping them and that someone else is
paying for art to enhance your living space. Chicago is a great town, it has
art everywhere. Not just on skid-row. It has a wonderful bunch of museums.
So get on with your life and stop bellyaching! Either go help someone, go do
some art and get paid for it. Or go kill yourself in a fit of depression, or
do whatever it is you want to do! Just stop blaming the world for all your
problems and everyone else's!
> Saint, I wouldn't have my name associated with anything you have done,
> as I have said. It is pure crap.
Oh, you are just jealous. So stop using my names in your stupid post addys!
You are a jealous, insane dude. I don't know exactly what got into you this
past year, but it's obvious I am not the only brunt of your insane
indignation. Priests seem to be a bane to you. Public art sucks in your
opinion. Rich people are full of shit and unable to see talent, no one is
helping your alkie pals in skid row so you blame the city government...man,
you got a whole sleigh full of issues this Christmas! You're the Depresso
Santa of the new millennium!You are a sick man. Get some help.
Saint.
elo...@baruch-menahem.com
|>You Are Getting Nervous And Defensive. Keep It Up. Perhaps A Well Deserved
|>Explosion Will Occur. And We Will Have Peace.
|>
murder - or sauer kraut, too. Gotta watch out for that stuff.
angeli...@baruch-menahem.com
|>
|>> Saint, it's Michelangelo. How could you copy one of his paintings, if
|>> you can't even copy the man's name?
|>
|>It never occurs to this dummy that I'm doing it on purpose.
|>
Yes, you are correct. It never once occurred to me that you were
doing it on purpose.
|>Spelling is different in different books, Baruch.
|>
However, Michelangelo only spelled his name one way. The fact that
many authors are ignorant of this fact does not speak well for those
who are authors.
|>I am TAUNTING you. Do you get that?
|>
No, I don't get it. I am convinced that you simply didn't know how to
spell Michelangelo's name. But as I said, don't feel too bad. They
spelled it wrong on the Art Institute of Chicago, as well. You're in
good company.
|>
|>I'm WASTING YOUR TIME. because really you are just wasting everyone else's
|>time.
|>
Saint, you cannot waste anyone's time other than your own. That is
the only person's time over which you have the least control. I
choose to spend my time doing as I do. It is my choice, as it is your
choice to spend yours doing as you do. Everyone chooses how to spend
his time. Is that a great system, or what?
|>Pablo Michelangelo DaVinci Picasso.
|>
Don't forget DeVito.
angeli...@baruch-menahem.com
|>> You've never met me. Actually my breath is sweet and pure, except
|>> when I've been eating lots of garlic. Then it would be best to avoid
|>> getting too close.
|>
|>Best to not get to close under any circumstances to this lying sack of human
|>refuse calling himself by a dozen names this week.
|>
|>Of course he claims that I did meet him, In Chicago, years ago, where I
|>stole *Speaking of Angels* from HIM! LOL! So I know all about his hot,
Ah, but I also admitted to that entire story as being complete
fiction. You lied about me, without offering proof. I lied about
you, without offering proof, to show you how it feels. However,
unlike you, I immediately admitted that what I had stated was actually
untrue. You still have not admitted to your lies. Such a shame.
|>stinking, predatory breath...don't I? And I know him personally, DON'T I!?
|>According to his own words...or was he lying? So either he's a liar, because
|>I KNOW he is. Or he's a liar because he SAYS HE IS!
Yes, I lied. I am not a liar. I did lie, but that does not make one
a liar. You have told the truth. Does that make you a truth-teller?
No. A single action does not make a person anything.
If you lose a card game, are you a loser? Of course not.
|>
|>He can't make up his mind about anything.
|>
I have made up my mind. I have stated, quite clearly, that the story
I invented about knowing you in Chicago was false - a lie. I had a
purpose in inventing that story. It was to give you a taste of what
you were doing to me, inventing false stories about me that you could
not back up with any evidence. It doesn't feel so good to be on the
receiving end, does it? But unlike you, I immediately admitted that
what I had fabricated was untrue. You continue to insist that your
lies are true, without ever demonstrating a single instance of them
being true, without a single example.
|>What little mind he has.
|>
My mind is sufficient for my needs. It allows me to distinguish truth
from fiction, which is a blessing that you seem to have been denied.
You need to learn to distinguish fact from fiction, truth from the
imaginations of your own mind. You are heading for serious trouble if
you don't start changing. You may find yourself lost with no way back
home, at least in this lifetime.
Seek the truth, however unpleasant it may be. It will always lead you
home. Anything else leads you astray.
Be well.
Baruch
Baruch
|>Here's evidence of UTTER STUPIDITY. And proof of his theft:
|><angeli...@baruch-menahem.com> wrote in message
|>
|>> I have seen what you must laughingly refer to your "art" gallery. You
|>> are a cartoonist, not an artist.
|>
|>Then you are blind. I just sold a painting. A copy of an 18th century
|>retablo, to an art collector from Spain. What have you sold lately? Your
|>blood?
|>
Do you know how many times the Brooklyn Bridge has been sold? There's
one born every minute, and some of them still have some money.
And what's the proof of my theft? My valid e-mail address?
|>> You wouldn't even be able to sign
|>> Michelangelo's name, because you can't spell it correctly. Don't feel
|>> bad - it's also misspelled on the Art Institute of Chicago - chiseled
|>> into the cement, spelled wrong. Oh, well.
|>
|>Well if the Art Institute of Chicago spelled it that way years before you
|>and I were born, why not follow their lead? Your spelling is no more valid
|>than anyone else's. Spelling differs in different texts. Prince Vlad Dracula
|>spelled his own name five different ways! You see in those days, spelling
|>wasn't "written in stone." But you knew that. You're just nit-picking.
|>
You're just trying to cover up for your mistake. Michelangelo spelled
his name as I have written. You simply made the easy mistake of
assuming it was supposed to be "Michael", when in fact it was not. As
I said, even the Art Institute folks blew it. But it's still wrong.
|>> Just as well, until you learn how to spell their names.
|>
|>This is nothing but an *extension* of an argument you are having with
|>yourself. No one cares how I spell his name. But you can be sure, when I do
|>a Michaelangelo that features his signature, I wouldn't put it on there
|>anyway. I am not a forger. I am an artist. And your vapid put-downs of my
You are a cartoonist.
|>work are ridiculous. I have seen nowhere any mention of you as either a
|>spokesman for the Arts or a valid art or literary critic. All you are doing
|>is testing me. Seeing if you can get me angry. Well, I've got years of work
Saint, all I have to do is say "good morning" to you, and you're
primed to rage at me. It doesn't matter what I say to you. You're
just filled with rage. Anything can trigger it off, at any time.
If I were to say, "Hey, that's good stuff", guess what? You'd get
angry with me for being sarcastic. If I say it's bad stuff you get
angry at me for insulting your work,. If I say I don't know if it's
good or bad, you'd get angry at me for not recognizing an obvious work
of genius.
And I have already told you, on your very worst day, you are a better
graphic artist than I ever will be. That is something of an
acknowledgement of your skill, though not much (I suck at graphic
art). But hey, it's better than my claiming I'm a better graphic
artist than you. That would be silly.
|>under my belt that cannot even go on the website because there is too much
|>of it. Let's see some of yours. Or are you one of those critics that
|>criticize those who CAN because you are one who CAN'T?
|>
I cannot. I never could, and chances are I never will. However, I
can recognize cartoons when I see them.
And what ever happened to that elephant?
|>
|>>> When did I ever say it's OK for me to "steal",
|>
|>Uhm just now!
|>
|>> I choose my
|>> handles because I like them. They are free for all to take.
|>
|>I see, I come up with the name angelicusrex and you say it is free for the
|>taking? How is that? I made it up. It's my name. I didn't offer it to you. I
|>came up witht he handle Elohim. I didn't offer it to you.You stole it. Then
Sorry, Saint. Elohim was taken long before you were ever invented.
Angelicusrex, ditto. Too bad. You have no claim of ownership to any
of your handles, with the possible exception of David St. Albans.
|>you called it *recycling.* Now you rationalize it is free for you to use?
|>How is that? Man, you really have an overblown ego for a guy who has nothing
|>to offer the world but hostility thinly glossed over with Mr. Goody
|>Two-Shoes words of politeness. It's called RESPECT. You demand it from
You have never shown any respect for me or anyone else on this
newsgroup. Deal with it. And if you think I've thinly glossed over
my hostility, then I have failed in my efforts to be blatantly rude to
you. Trust me, I do not want to be nice to you. You are an
unmitigated prick, OK? Is that blatant enough? How much more blatant
do I need to get? I can only do so much, Saint. But there's no gloss
of politeness over my words. I intend to be rude, as I told you on
October 3rd. Asshole. Dipshit. OK? Do you get it now? No thin
gloss. No nice words. Just nasty ones for you, stupid.
|>everyone and never give it to anyone, David. "Raphael!" (Imagine, using an
|>artists name and he can't even paint!)
|>
I don't think his name was David, though. And there are more
"Raphaels" than the painter.
|>You know you haven't done or said an original thing here in a year.
|>
Of course I have. Everything I do is original. Every last bit of
writing is unique.
|>> You can
|>> even take mine, you know. You could call yourself "Baruch", and
|>> there's not a thing I could do about it
|>
|>Sure there is, you could call me a thief every day of my life. And I would
|>be one. You would be right. Because I would be using your name without your
|>permission to make fun of you. Just like you are doing to me.
|>
Saint, many people share the same name. How many David's are there?
How many Baruch's? Dozens, thousands, maybe millions. There's bound
to be some overlap.
But I did not take any of your names. I took parts of your handles,
and I created valid e-mail accounts with them, as well as Yahoo!
accounts so I could post from there as well. You have no basis for
complaint.
|>> No one owns a handle. Deal
|>> with it.
|>
|>Nice rationalization of an immoral act. At least I don't want to be an idiot
|>like yourself. Jeez! What a great ego you have, Granma! And I will deal with
|>it by pointing out to everyone that you are a thief and a liar, everyday.
|>You asked me for proof. I give it daily.
|>
You can't steal what no one owns, Saint. You have no claim to any
handle. Anyone can use it, who chooses to do so. You will note that
I have *not* used your e-mail accounts. I don't know if that would be
stealing, but it wouldn't do me a whole lot of good, since you'd get
any e-mail addressed to me. But my handles are all valid, operational
e-mail addresses. Deal with it, and quit being such a crybaby. I
could have done a whole lot worse than what I did, as you know.
|>> I hope you don't engrave ivory.
|>
|>Well I DO engrave on IVORY, you stupid twerp! What do you know about Ivory
|>laws? Anything? I was in the business for 13 years! I know them inside and
|>out. So you call Someone, Anyone. See if they have any legal right to keep
|>me from doing artwork on legally purchased fossil and antique ivory! LOL!
|>You do not know whereof you speak.
|>
This is correct. This is why I said, "AFAIK". It was to indicate
that, "As Far As I Know...".
|>> AFAIK, that is now illegal, because
|>> of the dangerously lowered population of elephants.
|>
|>You dont know anything about the elephant population or the law.
|>
The elephant population is dwindling, due to poachers hunting them for
ivory, and as a result of ants of all things. This I do know. I know
nothing of the ivory laws, which is why I prefaced my comment with
"AFAIK".
|>> It's not
|>> something I'd be proud to admit, if I were you. Might as well tell
|>> people you club seals and make fur coats out of them, too.
|>
|>Right...who gives a shit? People who believe that would be idiots, same as
|>yourself. Believe me I've dealt with them. You knew I did scrimshaw from way
|>back. You never said a word about it. Now suddenly it's Baruch Lord of the
|>Elephants! Protector of the Forest! LOL!
|>
I didn't want to let your dirty little secret out, Saint. I felt it
would be a slur against your good name to mention that you had been
doing scrimshaw, that some poor elephant somewhere had given its life
so you could whittle on its tusk.
No, I'll take your word for it that it's legal. I certainly don't
know. But is it moral?
BTW, that scrimshaw example is spectacular. I have to admit it, that
is some fine piece of work (not the least bit of sarcasm here, Saint;
it's a work of art).
|>
|>> It's ASTOUNDING what passes for art these days, really. But I admit,
|>> you are a good cartoonist. And on your very worst day, you are a
|>> better graphic artist than I ever will be.
|>
|>That's right. And a better artist than you'll ever be. I really don't accept
|>art critiques from talentless boors who have none of their own work for me
|>to pick apart. Cartooning by the way is an artform. The sketches of the
Right. I am not a graphic artist. I'll match piano with you any day,
though.
|>great Michelangelo...Know what they were called? CARTOONS. So please, I am
|>in good company. You are just being a wretched Philistine, like your friend,
|>Boggle. What passes for art is what I SELL. Too bad you are incapable of
|>selling your premises here.
|>
Yes, I did know that. There are some examples of Michelangelo's
cartoons at the Art Institute of Chicago.
I would not be able to sell any of my own art. I *might* be able to
sell a bridge, perhaps. There are still plenty of people out there
who have more money than sense, and that will pay thousands for crap.
|>
|>
|>> But that's not saying a
|>> whole hell of a lot, really.
|>
|>Tell it to Charles Schulz and Scott Adams, Robert Williams and R. Crumb.
|>Again, I remain in good company.
|>
Uh, I was referring to saying you're a better graphic artist than I
am. Any of those folks is also a better graphic artist than I ever
will be, as I freely admit.
|>> I hope you sign them with your own name. That's Hieronymus Bosch.
|>> And you picked a mighty macabre bunch of artists to forge.
|>
|>Oh, so now the artist themselves are "macabre?" AND BTW, Bosch spelled
|>hisname several different ways as well. You are NOT an expert on anything.
|>We already know that. Whereas I took five years of Art History in school,
|>pal. Do you know anything about Art History? No? I didn't think so. Albrecht
|>Durer, macabre? You are so full of shit, Baruch, it's laughable! LOL.
|>
Uh, yes, I do find them macabre. Durer's "Melancholia" was very
sinister and macabre. Bosch was probably mentally ill. His creations
were consistently hideous and macabre, the product of a diseased
imagination. Just look at his "Last Judgment" stuff - I think they
call it something like a triptich. It's hideous. Garden of Earthly
Delights. Haywain, The Damned Punished in Hell - all hideous
monstrosities. That you don't find them macabre speaks volumes.
|>> What happened to the elephant, I wonder? Did he grow a new tusk?
|>
|>It died, Baruch. Like all animals. I respect the elephant. It died over a
|>hundred years ago. And I used what was left of the poor creature to produce
|>a beautiful object de art. Now, go convict the Japanese and Chinese who are
|>decimating the present herds for their ivory so they can have harder dicks!
Yes, I have to admit, that is a beautiful example of scrimshaw.
|>I don't need to feel guilty over what I do. I believe in using animals for
|>our needs and respecting them for it. We could have all the ivory we wanted
|>from beached whales and culled elephants. In fact the African Parks are
|>dying because they can no longer sell ivory legally from the herds they are
|>forced to cull as their parks shrink! So now the gorillas and rhinos and all
Boy, looks like I hit a nerve there. OK, I'm sorry I mentioned it.
Forget it, Saint. Never mind. Nuke the whales for Christ.
|>African animals are more endangered! I believe in respecting and utilizing
|>natural resources.Whereas you think abusing other human beings makes you
|>better than them! Again, you are so full of shit. Now you are going to try
|>to make people think I kill elephants! What a laugh. As if there is anyone
|>here who doesn't already hate my guts for no reason, you seek to give them a
|>reason!
|>
I don't think abusing anything or anyone makes a person better. It
makes him worse, IMNSHO.
|>> This does not mean that you have the least bit of talent;
|>
|>Uhm, you just said I was more talented than you! So why are you going back
|>on that? Hmmm? I'll tell you why, because Baruch speak with forked tongue!
No, it's just a way of saying that I have even less talent than you.
I have none. And yes, I have admitted that your example of scrimshaw
is a work of art.
|>LOL! You talk out of both sides of your face. You are a double-talker. One
|>minute it's one thing the next it is another! if you could only see what an
|>ass you are acting like!
|>
Why should you be the only one to do that? At any rate, I didn't
actually say you had no talent, I simply said that it didn't prove you
did. But the scrimshaw piece is a work of art, if you actually did it
(and I have no reason to doubt that you did).
|>> only that
|>> you have managed to convince some people with money that you do.
|>
|>Yeah, sorry I didn't convince poor, pitiful, nearly homeless survivalist
|>Baruch of my talent! He might have paid me a compliment...oh wait, he did,
|>then he took it right back!
|>
No. I flat out say that the scrimshaw is truly a work of art, without
reservations. No BS, no snide remarks, no hidden insults. It's a
work of art.
|>Does he see his hypocrisy? First I'm no artist. Then I'm a forger, then I am
|>an elephant killer, then I'm a good graphic artist and cartoonist, but those
|>things aren't worth a shit! Now I'm a talentless hack that convinced rich
No, I didn't say a "good graphic artist", I said better than I'll ever
be. That is not saying a whole hell of a lot, because I can't draw
anything to save my life - nor can I sculpt, scrimshaw, or do anything
except photography (quite good there, but there's a serious question
of whether that constitutes "art").
|>people I had talent! As if these people were somehow, in Baruch's might
|>OPINION, incapable of thinking for themselves, and were conned by a
|>talentless man! (Does he really think that is how these people got rich???
|>Byt being conned out of their money all the time?) Come on, Baruch. You've
|>gone totally nuts here! You aren't making any sense. You're anger has got
|>you saying things that make you look foolish.
|>
Hey, look - those people had money, didn't they? How dumb could they
be? If I was so smart, why ain't I rich? So maybe these people do
know something. But I have seen a whole lot of people with way more
money than common sense, buying all kinds of crap like velvet Elvis
paintings. Money does not always give a person artistic taste.
|>>
|>> Here in Chicago we have a 10- or 20-story baseball bat that cost
|>> $150,000. Someone took the City for a ride on that one. It was put
|>> up near Madison and DesPlaines streets, in the middle of Skid Row.
|>> All the alcoholics dying of their disease could look at it and know
|>> that the City was not neglecting the arts. Maybe neglecting the
|>> alcoholics, but who cares about them anyway?
|>
|>Well, we know you wouldn't piss on their faces if their teeth were on fire!
|>LOL! You misanthropic nutbar! What does a baseball bat have to do with
|>shelters? Museums and cities buy art. That goes to artists. Artists are
Well, you see, I first saw this thing about a month after I got sober.
I had been working in a law firm, and there was a case against the
City of Chicago for arresting an alcoholic during the winter, ignoring
his pleas for help, and winding up making him a double amputee.
I had to go to skid row to find one of the few witnesses who still had
a memory of that night. We knew where he lived. It was a flop house,
as might be expected. The walls were about three-four feet high, and
the rest was just chicken wire. There was vomit, feces, urine, and
vermin all over the place. You could stay there for 25 cents a night.
Well, I had to go pick up this guy and take him home to my place,
before the police found him and arrested him and "lost" him. That's a
very common technique with the police. They arrest witnesses that
might testify against them, lose the paperwork, and then release them
when the trial is over. Happens all the time.
So I go and pick up this guy - skid row derelict like any other, and
among other things, I see this goddamned baseball bat overlooking the
place where these people are dying.
Do you see the Hand of God in any of this? Isn't it a wee bit ironic
that, right after I stop drinking (a miracle in itself), I am required
by my job to go into skid row and see for myself what might have been
in store for me?
I went back there, too, to take some photos. I'll put one up on my
Website. I think you'll like it. Maybe not, but it kind of sums up
things.
|>people too. If they have pocket money, they usually give it to people in
|>need. Artists are very charitable. Someone needs to buy the ART so the
|>homeless will have someone else walking around with some change in their
|>pockets! What do you expect, for everyone to be dirt poor??? Go work in a
|>shelter and thank God someone is helping them and that someone else is
|>paying for art to enhance your living space. Chicago is a great town, it has
|>art everywhere. Not just on skid-row. It has a wonderful bunch of museums.
|>So get on with your life and stop bellyaching! Either go help someone, go do
|>some art and get paid for it. Or go kill yourself in a fit of depression, or
|>do whatever it is you want to do! Just stop blaming the world for all your
|>problems and everyone else's!
|>
Problems? What problems? Saint, I don't know what I've said to make
you think I have any problems, but my life is going rather nicely at
the moment. Of course, things can change in a moment, but right now,
thank God, things are OK.
I am well familiar with the museums, Sailing. I work right across
from the Art Institute. it's open late on Tuesday evenings, and it's
even free then. Can't beat it. There's also MCA and Terra, all within
reasonable walking distance in the summer, at least. And others I
probably don't even know about.
|>> Saint, I wouldn't have my name associated with anything you have done,
|>> as I have said. It is pure crap.
|>
|>Oh, you are just jealous. So stop using my names in your stupid post addys!
Those are not your names. Those are nothing but handles. And they
are legitimate e-mail addresses that all come directly (or indirectly)
to me.
|>You are a jealous, insane dude. I don't know exactly what got into you this
|>past year, but it's obvious I am not the only brunt of your insane
Oh, it's nothing much. You just pissed me off, that's all. You're
the only one that pissed me off, though. No one else has been so
consistently rude and ignorant towards me.
|>indignation. Priests seem to be a bane to you. Public art sucks in your
|>opinion. Rich people are full of shit and unable to see talent, no one is
What about priests? Some of my best friends are priests. Some of
them are fine, gentle souls. A very few are pederasts. It happens.
I don't know what you're ranting on about now, but I didn't say public
art sucks. I *like* the Picasso piece in Daley Plaza, for example.
Some of that stuff is great. Some, like the Calder at the Kluszinski
building, stinks (IMNSHO). But at least it doesn't overlook people
dying of neglect.
|>helping your alkie pals in skid row so you blame the city government...man,
|>you got a whole sleigh full of issues this Christmas! You're the Depresso
|>Santa of the new millennium!You are a sick man. Get some help.
|>
Uh, "Depresso Santa"? You know, you're just pissed off because I
didn't like most of your artwork. But like I said, that scrimshaw is
a beauty. That alone proves you're an artist. As for the rest...
angeli...@baruch-menahem.com
Must be getting tired...
|>I am well familiar with the museums, Sailing. I work right across
Must have spelled "Saint" wrong, and then OK'd the spell-check. Oops.
My bad.
Dean
and can fool most chritians without discernment.
www.worship.nu/spiritual-warfare/