More trips down the TRB memory lane: Nima and George Flemming on Dermod Ryder

[Death to Haifan Bahaism]

http://groups.google.com/group/talk.religion.bahai/browse_thread/thread/5e88f8b4b904fb36/436b5314088b90b8?q=I+am+beginning+to+agree+with+you+%2B+Dermod&lnk=ol&

That might make sense, except that you still haven't learned.
Dermod does not take orders from you.

If as you say Dermod has a mind of his own and does not take orders
from Nima, what then do you think of your great friend's post here
behind your back, agreeing with Nima you are an AO spy.

Surely you don't think Nima ordered him to write this letter, do you?

------------------------------------------
From: "Dermod Ryder" <***@btinternet.com> | This is Spam |
Add to Address Book
To: "Nima" <***@yahoo.com.au>
Subject: Re: Smaniac on TRB
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 02:40:07 -0000

Hi Nima,

snip>>>>>>>>>>>>

"On Palu, I'm moving to agree with you. The Chief Acolyte of the
Karenists has been strangely silent since it became known that she was
a real bad girl - indeed the only reaction was a gibe against Fred - I
expected much more from him than that .. if indeed he is the great
friend. But I'm not going to denounce him ... better to use him to
advantage ... you
know my views on dealing with spies ... feed them false information
and
feed them to their masters.

Snip>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I am after 20 plus years fighting the fuckers and her son's autism was
late in life discovery, whereas we knew from the Doodle's birth and
had
time to adjust with no expectations than that she would be disabled to
some
extent. I have been slowly encouraging her back to TRB - so leave the
bridge building with me to work on and just keep shooting the real
bastards,
including Palu. I won't be interfering there ... unless you gives me
a chance at a good ad-lib which I can never resist as in ... let it
all
hang out!"

As ever,

Dermod.
---------------------------------

Surely Paul Hammond does not believe Nima ordered Dermod to write
"just keep shooting the real bastards, including Palu."

How many posters to TRB are really coming to see how *weird this
crank Dermod Ryder's mindset is, who on the one hand is going to fuck
everybody up and down who he hates and on the other hand seeks pity
for himself by keeping mentioning his poor disabled daughter. A credit
goes to Nima for calling a spade a spade and pointing out the truth to
him here:

"You are not special on the planet by having to take care of a
disabled child, but you, on the other hand, use yours publically as a
weapon to play with the most gullible suckers on the planet, and screw
whoever stands in your way, and that makes you morally culpable in the
extreme not just towards other people you are screwing with but also
towards that poor little
girl."

Finally, what makes this even sicker on TRB is when BIGS Dr Maneck
and Pat Kohli and sycophant Paul Hammond keep supporting Dermod Ryder
in his obsessive vindictive vendetta against another poster on TRB.

Baldrick

[PaulHammond]

http://groups.google.com/group/talk.religion.bahai/browse_thread/thre...

That might make sense, except that you still haven't learned.
Dermod does not take orders from you.

If as you say Dermod has a mind of his own and does not take orders
from Nima, what then do you think of your great friend's post here
behind your back, agreeing with Nima you are an AO spy.
Surely you don't think Nima ordered him to write this letter, do you?
------------------------------------------
Add to Address Book
Subject: Re: Smaniac on TRB
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 02:40:07 -0000
Hi Nima,

The interesting thing here, is that this is you publishing the private
correspondence of a person who, at that time, you talked of as your
friend in order to attempt to score cheap points over me in a debate
on this forum. And this happened (look at the dates!) FOUR YEARS AGO.

Oddly, you still haven't worked out what you did wrong there, and what
an indication this is of how much you can be trusted to keep private
correspondence private. This is now you BOASTING about how you
released Dermod's private emails in this forum 4 years ago.

IIRC, this was something you'd tried on several times, trying to drive
a wedge between me and Dermod for some reason, when Dermod is someone
that I had always respected.

You wittered on for weeks, banging on about this post, as if you were
trying to get me to say something mean about Dermod when I saw what he
said about me behind me back - and I continued to tell you that I
didn't give a shit what he'd said to you in private correspondence, if
Dermod had a problem with me he could tell me to my face (or via email
if he wanted to keep it private).

I still think your repeated misreadings of what Dermod has been trying
to say to you over the years is one of the clearest examples of the
way you read only what you wish to believe into what others say to
you.

Another time this happened was over all that business when you started
claiming to be a new Manifestation of God, and later claimed that that
whole business was just you having a joke with the folks here, because
you knew how much it would bother Pat and Susan. You published or
said something about how Dermod was willing to back you up on all that
- but in fact Dermod had said something which you hadn't quite
listened to properly.

The details are hazy now - that was even more than 4 years back, and
was only a minor spat compared to your major breach. But it was very
clear you had taken Dermod's reaction to your ideas as much more of an
encouragement and back-up than they actually were.

Paul

[The Blue Fiddle]

Post by PaulHammond
The interesting thing here, is that this is you publishing the private
correspondence of a person who, at that time, you talked of as your
friend in order to attempt to score cheap points over me in a debate
on this forum. And this happened (look at the dates!) FOUR YEARS AGO.

Nothing interesting has happened to him in the last four years ... indeed he
has to go back four years to get something that he thinks will embarrass me.
He has never worked out why I sent that mail and never knew that it was
cleared, in advance, by some other people (who remain anonymous). He made
claims - he did not substantiate them. He was given more than ample
incentive to offer that substantiation and he failed to do so. I was
certainly moving, as the letter indicated and he determined the direction in
which I moved.

Post by PaulHammond
Another time this happened was over all that business when you started
claiming to be a new Manifestation of God, and later claimed that that
whole business was just you having a joke with the folks here, because
you knew how much it would bother Pat and Susan. You published or
said something about how Dermod was willing to back you up on all that
- but in fact Dermod had said something which you hadn't quite
listened to properly.

Starr and himself rang me one night to try to get my support for this
misadventure. He had talked about doing it some months before that and
acknowledged that, if it was to work, it would require meticulous
preparation. Now I'm almost always up for a caper ... what worth is life
without a laugh or three and, besides which, in a venture such as was
proposed, one could make a valid point or four. Unfortunately this project
was ill-conceived from the word go. It was Baldrick writ large - no clear
objective; no preparation; no concentration of force; no logistical
support - he announced it before getting the supporters on board. He then
proceeded to alienate the very people whose support was essential to
success. Those people were those he had befriended over the years. Once
they jumped ship, not surprisingly given the vituperation he hurled at them,
his "divinity" embarrassed none but himself. On Internet fora credibility
is everything ... assuming you expect or want to be taken seriously.
Nimikins blew his years ago ... and I'm not the fool who would follow after
him into oblivion. I avoided that caper like the plague it was. It was not
the caper he had proposed and, therefore, not one to which I could give
support. I think at the end of the day he began to believe it rather than
run it as a practical joke ... albeit with a point to be made

The project was even more ill-conceived because, frankly, he hasn't got what
it takes to pull off a practical joke. He can't even recognise one when he
sees it. When greatly exaggerated rumours of my demise started to circulate
Nimikins jumped in with both feet and claimed credit for it as my getting
just desserts for stabbing him in the back One, who has been an object of
Nimikin's ire and whose anonymity is preserved, observed, in a different
place that these rumours were precisely the sort of rumours I would take
fiendish delight in fostering, encouraging or even starting. Nothing
informs you better who your real friends are than the obituaries they utter.

The final breach with him came in the wake of the way he abused and tried to
humiliate Starr. Some of the details are indelibly marked in my mind - they
were and are entirely unacceptable behaviour and I'm not going to repeat
them. No human being, no matter how idiosyncratic, deserves the treatment
he meted out to her - especially when she had, at cost to her own
credibility, faithfully and enthustiastically suipported him, That comes
from one who is no shrinking violet when it comes to argument but I do draw
a line at humiliating an opponent when rationality should prevail.

Asparagus was conceived as a counter and, I am happy to say, it drove him
mad. When Nimikin's superior knowledge resulted in a triumphant declaration
that Asparagus was based in Scotland with connections to Australia and
elsewhere, I roared with delight ... and carried right on. Quite a few
people knew and - well done and thanks - never said or did anything to
enlighten his darkness. When he rang at 3.00a.m. to find out if I was alive
or not ... geez, words fail! Being the complete dork he is, when the
denouement came, he hadn't the basic common sense to admit and accept that
he had been conned! Had he done so he might have been able to salvage some
credibility ... but he didn't!

Post by PaulHammond
The details are hazy now - that was even more than 4 years back, and
was only a minor spat compared to your major breach. But it was very
clear you had taken Dermod's reaction to your ideas as much more of an
encouragement and back-up than they actually were.
Paul

[Death to Haifan Bahaism]

On Jul 2, 9:10 am, "The Blue Fiddle"
<***@btinternet.com> wrote:

<bs justifications snip>

Post by The Blue Fiddle
Asparagus was conceived as a counter and, I am happy to say, it drove him
mad.

In your dreams.

Post by The Blue Fiddle
When Nimikin's superior knowledge resulted in a triumphant declaration
that Asparagus was based in Scotland

That was your own claim, not mine.

Post by The Blue Fiddle
with connections to Australia and
elsewhere, I roared with delight ... and carried right on.

In other words, you carried on for over 18 months an actionable
charade of fraud on the internet. That you have to scrape the barrel
to find constant justifications for your fraudulent behavior here,
says volumes, otherwise you wouldn't be here fabricating totally bogus
yarns about your clear-cut fraud.

W

[The Blue Fiddle]

Post by Death to Haifan Bahaism
On Jul 2, 9:10 am, "The Blue Fiddle"
<bs justifications snip>

Post by The Blue Fiddle
Asparagus was conceived as a counter and, I am happy to say, it drove him
mad.

In your dreams.

You should trawl the archive!

Post by Death to Haifan Bahaism

Post by The Blue Fiddle
When Nimikin's superior knowledge resulted in a triumphant declaration
that Asparagus was based in Scotland

That was your own claim, not mine.

But since I knew where I was why would I do an IP number search and proclaim
that my IP number originated in Scotland when I knew exactly where I was?

Unless of course ... it was all part of a "cunning plan" ...

Post by Death to Haifan Bahaism

Post by The Blue Fiddle
with connections to Australia and
elsewhere, I roared with delight ... and carried right on.

In other words, you carried on for over 18 months an actionable
charade of fraud on the internet. That you have to scrape the barrel
to find constant justifications for your fraudulent behavior here,
says volumes, otherwise you wouldn't be here fabricating totally bogus
yarns about your clear-cut fraud.

I do so wish you would swot up on your legal knowledge ... it's getting
extremely boring having to point this out to you.

I would direct you to the Fraud Act 2006 of the UK Parliament.

Asparagus was a deception but not a fraud in that it did not (and had not
the intent to) result in depriving you (or anybody) of money or property.
Your misunderstanding, which may or may not be based in a misunderstanding
of Derry v Peek [1899] UKHL 1 (1 July 1889) has now been reversed.

I'm not supplying links for you - you can do your own research.

If any other readers would like the links, please contact me, in complete
confidence, privately.

Grow up little boy and show that you're fit to argue with the adults!

Post by Death to Haifan Bahaism
W

[PaulHammond]

I'm sorry, Nima - but can you explain to me why you expect to hold
Dermod to the words he said when he was posing as "asparagus" when
Dermod has admitted ages ago that "asparagus" was a wind-up?

Are you suggesting that, when YOU say "I was only pretending to be a
Manifestation of God and it was all a joke" we're all meant to pat you
on the back and say "what a clever boy! You're really sticking it to
them bastard Baha'is"

Yet when Dermod does a successful wind up on you, we're meant to be
all shocked and horrified and tell Dermod he's a terrible bad boy for
committing the actual CRIME of fraud and start talking to our lawyers.

Paul

Post by Death to Haifan Bahaism

Post by The Blue Fiddle
with connections to Australia and
elsewhere, I roared with delight ... and carried right on.

In other words, you carried on for over 18 months an actionable
charade of fraud on the internet. That you have to scrape the barrel
to find constant justifications for your fraudulent behavior here,
says volumes, otherwise you wouldn't be here fabricating totally bogus
yarns about your clear-cut fraud.
W

[All Bad]

Post by PaulHammond
I'm sorry, Nima - but can you explain to me why you expect to hold
Dermod to the words he said when he was posing as "asparagus" when
Dermod has admitted ages ago that "asparagus" was a wind-up?
Are you suggesting that, when YOU say "I was only pretending to be a
Manifestation of God and it was all a joke" we're all meant to pat you
on the back and say "what a clever boy! You're really sticking it to
them bastard Baha'is"
Yet when Dermod does a successful wind up on you, we're meant to be
all shocked and horrified and tell Dermod he's a terrible bad boy for
committing the actual CRIME of fraud and start talking to our lawyers.

SecretChiefs3?

He is a pathetic little loser.

- All Bad

[The Blue Fiddle]

Post by PaulHammond
I'm sorry, Nima - but can you explain to me why you expect to hold
Dermod to the words he said when he was posing as "asparagus" when
Dermod has admitted ages ago that "asparagus" was a wind-up?
Are you suggesting that, when YOU say "I was only pretending to be a
Manifestation of God and it was all a joke" we're all meant to pat you
on the back and say "what a clever boy! You're really sticking it to
them bastard Baha'is"
Yet when Dermod does a successful wind up on you, we're meant to be
all shocked and horrified and tell Dermod he's a terrible bad boy for
committing the actual CRIME of fraud and start talking to our lawyers.

Poor old Nimikins doesn't know the first rule of the con. Sadly he also
doesn't understand the first rule of the prank.

Unfortunately he also failed to understand that assumption of divinity does
not necessarily instil capability in undertaking the con or the prank.

What really pisses him is that a t'ick Mick took him to the cleaners and
back and revealed yet another aspect of his innate nastiness. Even worse
than that was that the t'ick Mich showed a reat talent, and not for the
first time, at deluding and taking the piss out of ego bloated by
religiosity - a talent not bestowed upon or earned by the Divine
manifestation of the Banyanis.

I'd purely love to know how he can claim that he knew who Asparagus was
right from word go and expect anybody to believe him.

Why then did he proclaim that Asparagus was in Scotland which prompted him
to then try to denigrate the Celtic cousins ... of mine?
Why then did he state that on analysis of the musings of Assparagus he found
evidence that the posts showed evidence of many authors?
Why did he not proclaim that Asparagus was hinting that he himself was
'deid'?
Why did he not proclaim that Asparagus was winding up the readership?
Why did he start the rumour that Mr Reaper was 'deid' - one of his many
aliases on Stetson's group?
Why, if he knew it all all along, did he claim credit for Mr Reaper's demise
being merited as punishment for stabbing Nimikins in the back?
Why, if he knew it all all along, did he feel constrained to telephone Mrs
Reaper at an ungodly hour?
Why did he try to get John to also telephone Mrs Reaper ... if he knew it
all all along?

The list goes on and on.

And if he knew it all all along, why did he take the denouement with such
bad grace?
Indeed why did he not preempt Asparagus?

I think the effectivenes of the con is manifest in the studious efforts of
the deluded one to attribute criminality to it. After all only a really
astute mind could so fox or outwit the divine inheritor of the Banyan.

Thanks for the compliment, Nimikins. I thoroughly deserve it.