Whose Planet Is It Anyway?

Monday, October 02, 2006

Child Abuse Accusations: Enough

I'll admit that I have been known to write long, sarcastic rants bitching people out (sometimes unfairly) if I think they're jerks. Still, there are some very basic lines that I won't cross. Making accusations of child abuse to score points in a debate is one of them.

There has been quite a lot of this from both sides of the biomed debate recently, and it needs to stop. This sort of behavior intimidates decent parents who may not even be involved in the biomed debate but just want to blog about their family's life with an autistic child. They're very likely to have second thoughts about starting (or continuing) a blog when they see threats to report parents for abuse because they use biomed products, or threats to report parents for neglect because they are not using any therapies, or wild accusations that all the parents on one side or the other are beating their kids.

And we need more parent blogs, whether or not they agree with everything we have to say. We need more people writing about the real-life experiences of raising autistic children so that society can see many points of view, not just the grossly distorted propaganda of Autism Speaks and other slimeballs who use images of hopelessness and of child murder as a deliberate tactical ploy to manipulate parents' emotions and exploit them financially.

What's more, I really hope that the child abuse accusations are just idle rants and that no one has been following through on threats to call child protective agencies. You know what happens when an autistic child gets put in foster care while suspicions of abuse or neglect are investigated? Marcus Fiesel happens. Routine drugging to make a child docile happens. About 85 percent of children in foster care in the United States are on some sort of psychiatric drug, sometimes multiple drugs (and by the way, this has nothing to do with the recent increase in the number of children identified as autistic; it's been like that for decades). Physical and sexual abuse by other foster children with serious emotional problems can happen, even when the foster parents are decent and responsible. A news article that I read in the wake of the Marcus Fiesel murder cited a research study showing that children who have been in foster care have a higher rate of post-traumatic stress disorder than combat veterans.

I don't care how much you hate a certain parent's opinions, think he's a total asshole, or believe that his kid would be better off with almost anyone but him. Unless you know that his kid is in actual danger (and you don't, because all you've seen is a lot of Internet hot air, which tells you almost nothing about how he treats his kid in real life) you have no business making a child abuse report that could result in the kid being unnecessarily placed in foster care. Nobody has the right to put an innocent child at risk because of a personal vendetta against the parent. Not ever.

Labels: ,

166 Comments:

  • ABHF,
    Im VERY sorry.I have not nor will I report anyone for anything like this.
    I would like to explain more about my original point but I did get involved with a debate that I had no bussiness getting involved with. I spoke COMPLETLY inapropriately. My emotions directed me say what I shouldnt have but thats no exuse.
    I am more capable of learning than the "specialist"say was part of my original point. My apologies to you and anyone I offended. Im sorry.
    Thanks, Ed

    By Blogger Ed, at 3:33 PM  

  • Hey, good post! It's about time somebody from Neurodiversity got something right!

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 3:40 PM  

  • JBJr: "Hey, good post! It's about time somebody from Neurodiversity got something right!"

    You going to clean up your act on this one, too, John?

    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:56 PM  

  • Ed: Please don't be upset! I wasn't offended by anything you wrote. This is about other people who made threats and unfair accusations on other blogs.

    John and David: Yes, both sides need to clean up their act.

    By Blogger abfh, at 4:18 PM  

  • Agreed.



    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:20 PM  

  • Am I missing something here? The only person I've seen accusing anybody else of child abuse is John and Erik - usually me, Kathleen or Camille.

    By Blogger Kev, at 4:40 PM  

  • I once posted on the AutAdvo board that I would never accuse Kev of child abuse since stupidity is not a crime but I think Travis deleted it. So, I'll take this opportunity to send that message to Kev. I apologize if I called you a child abuser, it's not your fault.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 4:47 PM  

  • Thanks ABHF,
    More often than not, I am prone to learn from my mistakes rather than careful observation. Im always glad when I get to learn from the smaller mistakes rather than the bigger ones and I really did learn something valuable here.
    Thanks, Ed

    By Blogger Ed, at 4:53 PM  

  • Um, John: "I once posted on the AutAdvo board that I would never accuse Kev of child abuse since stupidity is not a crime but I think Travis deleted it. So, I'll take this opportunity to send that message to Kev. I apologize if I called you a child abuser, it's not your fault."

    Two things...

    First... the emboldened sentence in the following quote...

    QUOTE:
    John Best : 5 months, 2 weeks ago

    Kevin;
    Give it a rest. I don’t have anything against Muslims. It just so happens it’s extremists from that faith who are doing most of the terrorism these days.
    Kassiane;
    Not chelating kids who have been poisoned by mercury is child abuse.
    /QUOTE.

    Since Kevin does not chelate his daughter, you cannot logically avoid havign applied that statement to him: ergo, you did in fact call him a child abuser. And that lovely piece of proof came from your very own thread on him blog.

    Secondly... WhoTF is Travis?

    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:02 PM  

  • "havign"->"having" ... Sometimes I type too fast...

    DNA-MEd(Dec2006)

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:08 PM  

  • MEd;
    Isn't Travis Frank's partner who moderates that board? Did I spell his name wrong?
    I thought even you could understand that I qualified my remark to state that stupidity was not a crime which exempts Kev. That wouldn't apply to Kassiane with her genius IQ.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 5:35 PM  

  • JBJr: "Isn't Travis Frank's partner who moderates that board?"

    Er, no.

    "Did I spell his name wrong?"

    Not even close!

    "I thought even you could understand that I qualified my remark to state that stupidity was not a crime which exempts Kev."

    Not really... you failed to put the disclaimer in the quoted bit, so you failed to disclaim on the quoted bit; ergo, you did in fact call Kevin a child abuser.

    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:40 PM  

  • MEd;
    I get it now. Since Kev doesn't realize how stupid he is, I have to spell it out for him every time I comment about him. OK, if I make that statement again someplace, I'll be sure to say that Kev is excluded on the basis of advanced stupidity. Would that be better?

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 6:33 PM  

  • There's more on that from John. For example:

    "Then you [David] might realize that allowing your child to go through life disabled when she could be cured is child abuse. I think you should put her up for adoption so a rational parent can help her." (Around Sep 04)

    "Not attempting to cure those severe kids is unquestionably child abuse." (Around May 30)

    "The nonsense spouted by Seidel and her deranged Diva is no more than child abuse and should be put in its' place by sane people who know better." (Around Feb 02)

    By Blogger Joseph, at 6:34 PM  

  • Fore Sam is deliberately writing "Travis" when he's been told point-blank a couple times that "Travis" is wrong. It's typical troll junk. I think it was John Best Jr who accused "soapbox mom" of physical child abuse. He had been accused of child abuse on the web (not by me) because he described punching his child.

    Didn't JB Handley make accusations of child abuse? He's abused me often enough, maybe I'm just remembering his abuse of me.

    If a *mandated reporter* has read what Erik Nanstiel has written about the way he treats his daughter, that mandated reporter might very well feel "mandated" to report Erik Nanstiel for real child abuse. That's dead serious, not snark. I haven't reported anyone to authorities for child abuse, but believe me it has occurred to me that maybe I should. (I'm not a mandated reporter) Children's lives are on the line when parents do some things to their kids which those parents describe on the web. It's balancing abuse going on in the family with potentially worse abuse/trauma that could happen in a foster home.

    It would be horrific for a child to be taken from his home and put in foster care, but it would also be horrific for a community to stand by and listen to a parent describe how he's going to do something possibly deadly to his child (thinking HBOT at home or IV disodium EDTA).

    People shouldn't make snotty comments about child abuse, though. Autistics have experience what seemed to their parents as normal amounts of ABA therapy and those kids--now adults-- report it as abusive. I don't know if there have been specific accusations of "you are abusing your child with ABA." There might be, it's probably not very helpful to anyone if that kind of accusation is going on.

    By Anonymous Camille, at 6:50 PM  

  • Kev: I've seen some of it from our side, most recently in Soapbox Mom's now-deleted comments, but in other places also.

    I think it's inexcusable no matter who does it.

    By Blogger abfh, at 7:07 PM  

  • Hi
    I have wondered last months if parents/researchers/profesionals/autistic adults/people in general thinking different about autism can construct a different space of meeting in the hub- figuratively talking- when these kind of accusations have no place, whatever the side, and a different look is going to be possible.
    But I do not see the climate prone for a change.
    Beyond the extremes, for many of us, the ideas of neurodiversity about the respect of our autistic children souls is present every second. But we look other aspects also and , at least I, see also that the treatment of many medical conditions that are together with the ASD diagnosis can bring to his life health and happiness- even when these will not change his genetics.
    Without personalization or generalization for me is the only road to interact with others enough time to be understood properly, in a situation when misunderstanding/aggresion in advance is the rule.
    Therefore I wonder Is it possible?
    Do you think this position of another kind of debate is interesting ( or important) to share or for many of ND parents it is not?
    Sincerely
    María Luján

    By Blogger María Luján, at 7:30 PM  

  • Camille;
    Spanking a child is a far cry from punching. Remarks like that are what has us at each other's throats. Erik's description of holding a child for a shot or having blood drawn is something we've all had to deal with. It's no fun but it's nothing near child abuse. You making it sound that way is absurd. Why don't you enlighten me about that guy's name? I did think it was Travis.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 7:44 PM  

  • JBJr: "Remarks like that are what has us at each other's throats."

    And you don't make similar ones, John? Your friend Susan Lord thinks I got nasty at you for some reason connected with me (as in: trying to make out that I'm the one being a total bastard to you), but you were absolutely nasty from the day I (and others) first encountered you on AutAdvo. The posts you made there was absolutely horrible. And you ignore them to tell that to Camille?

    Much as I agree with you that ABFH made a good post on this topic, I can't agree with you telling Camille of, when you have been a huge factor in why people respond to you in that way...

    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:08 PM  

  • JBJr (elsewhere): "And, even though Andrews doesn't have a blog, he merits consideration."

    Want to know what keeps people at each others' throats, John???

    Look at your own input before having a go at others. I doubt you have the strength of character. And nor does Susan Lord, for that matter.

    You and her complain about me getting nasty towards you two, but you still want to have the right to be nasty at me.

    You don't have much room to talk on the topic of "remarks like that are what has us at each other's throats" until you sort out how you behave towards others. What is so hard for you to get about that?

    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:13 PM  

  • JBJr: "I did think it was Travis."

    Parrish.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:14 PM  

  • Dave, A psychologist should be able to discern the intent of certain things uttered in the midst of hostilities. A poker player would have no trouble making that determination.
    ABFH appears to be seeking truce talks while you're trying to fan the flames by spying on other blogs but commenting here.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 8:26 PM  

  • John: "Dave, A psychologist should be able to discern the intent of certain things uttered in the midst of hostilities. A poker player would have no trouble making that determination.
    ABFH appears to be seeking truce talks while you're trying to fan the flames by spying on other blogs but commenting here."

    Don't come on like that, John. Like, suddenly you're all sweetness and light! No, I'm not accepting that. If you want to call Camille on her remarks, you have to be prepared to be called on yours: you and Susan call me on anything I say (and even have a nasty jibe whether I try to lose the hostility or not... how the fuck can I be expected not to feel serious antipathy towards you and her?).

    Even so... I have tried, and bloody hard too... bit no, not good enough for Johnny and Susie... they just want to be nasty regardless of how someone tries to be much less hostile to them, don't they? And your blog is a perfect example of it. Isn't it? So, come on, John. You and Susie show something like truce-making behaviours. I'm sick of being the one being nice, whilst you and her get your rocks off by being more than a bit nasty anyways.

    I've been looking at how you do things, John, and I don't see anything that looks to me like you have any reason to talk about anyone's attempt at 'truce'.

    Not yet. And I have a feeling I shouldn't even hope to see such evidence.

    Ind I shouldn't be surprised if I'm not on my own on this.

    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:39 PM  

  • And I'm not convinced that your intent (and Susan's) has ever been anything other than to create friction.

    Show me where you and her have actually shown me any respect, for example. Or Camille. Or (insert name here).

    I don't think that you'll be able to find anything.

    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:41 PM  

  • Dave;
    I stopped calling you Sanity Pending. That's a start.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 8:53 PM  

  • JBJr: "Dave;
    I stopped calling you Sanity Pending. That's a start."

    Um... only to start calling me either Aqualung or Mr Ed.

    Some start.

    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:56 PM  

  • JBJr: "This is good brainstorming. Maybe Andrews will have some other suggestions next time he does some spying."

    And that?

    Come on... you gotta do better than that...

    First time I've looked at your blog in a long while, actually, and I still see this...

    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:58 PM  

  • Dave;
    It's called having fun.
    If anyone in this debate were actually going to try to settle anything for the good of all people on the autistic spectrum, some sane dialogue would have to take place. Who started the hostilities here today?

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 9:27 PM  

  • JBJr: "It's called having fun.
    If anyone in this debate were actually going to try to settle anything for the good of all people on the autistic spectrum, some sane dialogue would have to take place. Who started the hostilities here today?"

    After your antics, which have been fucking mean as hell, do you really think that you can get away with the 'having fun' crap?

    Might throw this open to the rest of the contributors. Do you think that Janna-Louise felt that it was fun when you had your nasty go at her on her blog?

    Maybe you really do have an empathy deficit. I really don't know.

    You're too much an unknown quantity these days, John. And that's gonna fuck up anyone's capacity to tell when you're 'having fun'.

    I agree that dialogue would be good, but you haven't exactly done much yourself to get it going... much of the time actually bordering on the criminal with your actions on the blogs... it doesn't inspire me to trust anything you say.

    What's the guarantee that you won't go and blog about having "managed to fuck with the neurodiversity lot's heads yet again" after this? Can anyone here trust you not to?

    Explain to me clearly why we should trust you.

    As for who started the hostilities.... "Hey, good post! It's about time somebody from Neurodiversity got something right!"

    Doesn't inspire, really.

    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:37 PM  

  • Dave;
    Kev said...
    Am I missing something here? The only person I've seen accusing anybody else of child abuse is John and Erik - usually me, Kathleen or Camille.

    4:40 PM

    This started the hostilities today Dave.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 9:42 PM  

  • Is he wrong?

    What were you doing on AutAdvo all the time if not saying that anyone who doesn't chelate their autistic child is de facto a child abuser?

    Was Kevin wrong?

    The posts are archived there, John. You not able to accept that you were wrong to say it? You'd like the ND lot to say "we did some wrong thigns" but you don't want to say that you did?

    Hm...

    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:49 PM  

  • I think a distinction should be made between accusing/calling someone of child abuse with no intention of reporting that person to any authorities, and saying things like this, by Kassiane;

    "That might be partly my fault. I kinda sorta DID post that I have child protective services numbers for all 50 states and have no qualms about dialing them..."

    I have been 'in care' for my own protection and I know about abuse. Real abuse.
    Anyone who overtly threatens to inform the child protection services of child abuse over a difference of opinion, no matter how passionate they are in their opinion, is guilty of potential child abuse

    I also think another important line should be drawn here.
    The line concerning adults who should know better, who stoop so low as to use innocent children in their arguments, such as this;

    “You have some room to talk, really... one day you kid will kick shit out of you for being too stupid to realise he's not a worthless being!

    I would love to video that day!”

    Now, David Andrews. What have you got to say about the above. You know you said this, and you come on here quoting John about adults being at each others throats!

    "And you don't make similar ones, John? Your friend Susan Lord thinks I got nasty at you for some reason connected with me (as in: trying to make out that I'm the one being a total bastard to you), but you were absolutely nasty from the day I (and others) first encountered you on AutAdvo. The posts you made there was absolutely horrible. And you ignore them to tell that to Camille?"

    What on earth are you talking about?
    I called you a bastard because only a callous bastard would say what you said about my son.
    I told you, you can call me all the names under the sun as adult to adult, but using an innocent child in this way is bang out of order!
    How many times do I have to explain this to you.
    I was civil reasonable with you.
    Now you're complaining about how nasty I was about you afterwards.
    You know why.
    I asked you to tell me you didn't say this, but you did not and have still not denied you made this comment.
    You keep saying, "leave me alone". Stop harping on about how nasty I was and will be towards you, and I will leave you alone.
    When you make SADISTIC SICK comments about someones child, WHAT DO YOU EXPECT BACK.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 10:01 PM  

  • SL: "How many times do I have to explain this to you."

    Okay.

    You were being a bastard towards me before I even said anything to you.

    NOW... shut up and leave me alone.

    Shouldn't you be in bed?

    If you're wanting civil, however... I'l throw something in here.

    "I have been 'in care' for my own protection and I know about abuse. Real abuse."

    My mother was, too. And yes, it was fucking horrible abuse.

    However, you can keep your fucking Aqualung remarks to yourself.

    And accept some responsibility for your own nasties too.

    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:09 PM  

  • From a former foster child and current child advocate...

    What happened to Marcus Fiesel in foster care is an atrocity. But the treatment he received from his biological mother was not much better.

    He was removed from her more than once. Why? Because he was covered with feces. Because her boyfriend physically abused him and left bruises. And, because he was found wandering alone on the streets at night while in her care.

    His biological mother did not want him back in her custody. Before his murder at the hands of his foster parents, she had already gone to court to voluntarily relinquish her rights.

    She wanted his siblings - but she didn't want him.

    In another recent Ohio example, Mildred N. McMannis, 40, stands accused of starving and beating her mentally handicapped son.

    Her son is 16 years old -- and weighs 67 pounds.

    McMannis claims that she restricted his caloric intake to keep him from getting diabetes (?) but his siblings tell a different tale.

    They say that she withheld food as a form of punishment.

    I agree that the foster care system needs drastic improvement.

    I am totally against the drugging of foster youth, and I have and will continue to write articles and blog entries against this practice.

    But, the sad fact is that there are dads out there who rape their own children. Moms who abuse or neglect them. And parents who plain-out don't want their own children.

    So, rather than advocating a "don't ask, don't tell" policy regarding biological parents, I am in favor of a "screen the h*ll out of foster parents."

    And, while you are at it, put the spotlight of scrutiny on social workers and administrative agencies, too.

    Lisa
    http://sunshinegirlonarainyday.blogspot.com/

    By Blogger Lisa, at 10:10 PM  

  • Lisa: "And, while you are at it, put the spotlight of scrutiny on social workers and administrative agencies, too."

    Oh, yes.

    Might actually get some agreement here from SL, too. The LEAs in the UK tend to vary greatly; not in terms of money that they get, but in terms of poliotical ideology, and it tends to be the Labour-controlled councils that maintain the worst LEA in England and Wales.

    My mother - when adopted - didn't really fare much better with the woman who adopted her, from what I here, than when she was in the foster/care home in Haddington that she was in.

    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:19 PM  

  • "from what I here"->"from what I hear"... 5.17am

    DNA-MEd(12/2006)

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:23 PM  

  • David;
    I am going to bed don't worry.
    But before I go.

    "You were being a bastard towards me before I even said anything to you."

    Not true.
    Your unprovoked comment was made to me towards the start of a post on Johns site.

    What is your definition of a bastard?
    Almost everyone in this autism divide shit is being nasty, sarcastic, condescending and taking the piss out of each other, and you are no exception.
    It seems to be par for the course.

    We are talking about lines that shouldn't be crossed, and you crossed the line.
    You should be prepared to take the consequences.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 10:34 PM  

  • SL: "Your unprovoked comment was made to me towards the start of a post on Johns site."

    Wrong.

    SL: " said...

    On ABFH site, on the "one book" post, David N,s reaction to the "Behaviour analyst" had me in stitches;"

    That post.

    I hadn't said ANYthing to you at that point.

    You started.

    You crossed the line.

    Now leave me alone.

    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:45 PM  

  • David;
    You're not getting the point.

    "On ABFH site, on the "one book" post, David N,s reaction to the "Behaviour analyst" had me in stitches;"

    Is that what you class as being a bastard?
    Did you read my last comment?
    This thread is about "Accusations of child abuse" and how abfh thinks this is wrong.

    I am pointing out to you that you whine on about me being nasty to you, after saying you would like to video my kid kicking the shit out of me for being too stupid to realise he's not a worthless being.

    Big assumption.
    Absolutely wrong.
    Crossing the line.
    The type of thing a bastard says.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 11:05 PM  

  • SL: "David;
    You're not getting the point."

    Wrong again, Susan.

    YOU are missing the point.

    By a fucking mile.

    "On ABFH site, on the "one book" post, David N,s reaction to the "Behaviour analyst" had me in stitches;"

    From my experience, also something that a bastard says. And I know shitloads about bastards... met many at school. And they were all like you. Take the piss without even knowing someone first.

    You're no fucking different to them.

    NOW... leave me alone.

    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:10 PM  

  • David;

    "On ABFH site, on the "one book" post, David N,s reaction to the "Behaviour analyst" had me in stitches;"

    "From my experience, also something that a bastard says."

    You are a good politician, but a poor psychologist.

    Did you make that comment about my son?

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 11:18 PM  

  • Susan.

    You were extremely condescending towards me without having even interacted with me. You basically treated me publically as "to be pitied", whilst privately holding the view that I am worthless.

    Presumably because I'm autistic.

    And every other autistic that disagreed with you was getting the same treatment. Probably for the same reason.

    By implication, since you treat adult autistics as worthless, you obviously think your child is; and since you can't see the connection, you probably do think that, despite your 'anger'.

    You'd be prepared to take a serious risk in chelating him for mercury poison he doesn't actually have in order to get a 'fixed' son....? Who isn't even broken in the first place?

    You hold that view and then say you don't think he's worthless?

    You treat any autistic who disagrees with you as worthless, but your view of your kid is different? Do you 'pity him', too?

    Because it's your support he needs, not your pity.

    And certainly not chelation.

    You make an excellent bastard. You'll be an even shittier psychologist than you think I am, when (if) you ever get through it.

    As for the comment... don't ask me, because I don't recognise it.

    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:40 PM  

  • A depressing example of the utter irrelevancy of John and his latest minion.

    I really would like to stress to people that John's opinion of anyone as either an autistic person, as a parent or under any other circumstances is meaningless to him other than as fodder for his ego. You respond to John all you're doing is providing fodder for his belief he has anything of worth or merit to say.

    jonsmum aka Susan Lord aka kevin_1000 is a slightly different kettle of fish. She's relatively new to the scene and so might be worth attempting to converse with. Unfortunately she seems to have fallen under the belief that it is necessary to agree with John in order to disagree with others.

    Susan - 'wj' et al who post on Johns blog are a (very) young man called Matthew Pearson from Norway. He thinks Downs Syndrome kids should be aborted. He thinks we should be hung with the corpses of our dead children. This is the person you believed had 'outed' me on John's blog. He regularly makes such claims. You being new wouldn't know that. I ask you, if you agree with anything I or others say or not, does this sound like a sane or rational person to take at face value or ally yourself with?

    You made a huge issue out of another blogger spanking her son, comparing it to abuse. When I pointed out John had done the exact same thing you said that was different.

    These actions merely serve to make you look duplicitous and silly. If you want to disagree with me or others thats absolutely your right. However, simply agreeing with everything that comes out of John's banal mouth is a bit sad.

    John was recently appalling enough to get banned from a largely biomed community. He made rather unsavoury remarks about child porn stars as I recall. Whilst the amusing irony of John being stupid enough to be a staunch biomed support getting banned from such a forum is not lost on me, I'd like to ask you to consider if your beliefs about autism are dependant on your unflinching support of such a person.

    I maintain regular email contact with three other Rescue Angels. We don't agree on a lot of things but we are civil. You should know that John's actions appal them. They find him frightening and are bewildered as to how he is still a Rescue Angel at all. I *think* one of them has either spoken to Brad or is thinking about it. Even outside the GR userbase, outside of a few extremists John is seen as a dangerous inconvenience. Someone very high up in a certain anti-mercury campaign group told me that John once got up to speak uninvited to a mercury rally. This person claimed that the crowd grew increasingly concerned at John's rant. He left the podium to bewildered and uncomfortable silence apparently.

    Susan, your beliefs are your beliefs and you should argue them as you see fit. However, if I were you I would do some close examination of those you want to claim as allies. We can still disagree without you being encumbered by the albatross of ridicule John will bequeath you.

    By Blogger Kev, at 1:31 AM  

  • Jonsmum:

    Leave me the fuck out of this. DON'T talk to me about real abuse, not until you've had to lie about your 2 (at once. That you can't fix. When the ER knows damn well you usually can) simultaneous hip dislocations. You don't have a monopoly on suffering. Not even close. I heard stories from kids I worked with who were in the system that were just as bad as the stories from the kids who should have been that were just as bad as my stories.

    Why the fuck else would I HAVE such a list? Oh. Right. Because I have been a mandated reporter since age 16 and take such things very, very seriously.

    As for Mr Best:

    Leave my IQ alone. If you don't have anything else to say except that you're jealous of my IQ and you don't understand Rett, then we all know, we know, we KNOW. Your repeated commenting on such things are a) perseverative and b) a waste of bandwidth.

    By Blogger Kassiane, at 2:35 AM  

  • Kev;
    Good exaggeration! That's what we expect from you. Spanking a kid once who harms an infant is much different than spanking the kid as a means of teaching safety like Soapbox Mom.
    I spoke at one small mercury rally. I was invited to speak. The few people who were there applauded during the speech. You don't care for the truth much, do you? The person who claimed the crowd became concerned to you could only have been Kathleen Seidel. Since she was part of the crowd, she can state that with a tiny degree of honesty. That's the degree of honesty we usually get from her.
    The biomed community that myself ans Sirinath were banned from was moderated by one of the neurodiverse. You left out that fact, Kev. How convenient! Just like you, opposing views that you can't deal with are banned. I always welcome you to comment in my ballpark because I have no trouble at all putting your ridiculous views in their place.
    I don't believe that even one Rescue Angel has complained about me to you since nobody has said one word to me. The comments I get off my blog approve of my blowing up your idiocy.
    Have you checked on that shooting in Pennsylvania yesterday to see if any of the kids who got shot were autistic so you can use their corpses for your cause? I wouldn't want you to miss an opportunioty to use dead children to support your platform, Kev.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 4:27 AM  

  • David;
    "The posts are archived there, John. You not able to accept that you were wrong to say it? You'd like the ND lot to say "we did some wrong thigns" but you don't want to say that you did?"
    In your state, you think lots of things I say are wrong. I've tried to help you but you can't see logic. Some people are moles on that site just as you are on the EOHarm list and talk about it behind people's backs. I just brought it out in the open. That's what adults do, David. I don't throw people off my site and lie about the reasons like Kev. I face the problem. Problems are noot solvable if one is afraid to face them.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 4:40 AM  

  • See what I mean Susan?

    John claims he only hit his child once. I know that not to be the case as he has informed several people that he has hit his son on several occasions. He's also stated he would be happy for his son to be dead rather than autistic. Do you share that view Susan?

    I also stated to John that the person at the rally was a high up member of a mercury organisation. Not a 'neurodiverse' (whatever that is). He is free to believe whatever he wants of course but there is a difference between honesty and self-delusion. John crossed that line a long time ago.

    John chooses to believe that the moderator who banned him was a 'neurodiverse' - this is simply laughable but again, shows the depth of paranoia John lives in. Did you know that John believes last years online AWARES conference (this years starts in a few days - See here for details ) was staged by various 'neurodiverse' with the sole intention of harvesting memorable quotes from him.

    I reiterate Susan - its not necessary to like, respect or agree with me or anyone else but if you truly want to debate your corner then move away from John - he's really not a good person to hang around with. Just think it over is all I'm saying.

    By Blogger Kev, at 4:50 AM  

  • David;

    "You basically treated me publically as "to be pitied", whilst privately holding the view that I am worthless."

    I do no "privately" hold the view that you are worthless.
    Are you a mind reader?
    Just because you say this doesn't make it true.
    As for "pitied", I actually said, "I almost feel sorry for him"
    This does not equate to me thinking you, my son or any other autistic person is "worthless".
    This is no more than an "implication" you present to support your argument.

    "And every other autistic that disagreed with you was getting the same treatment. Probably for the same reason."

    "By implication, since you treat adult autistics as worthless, you obviously think your child is; and since you can't see the connection, you probably do think that, despite your 'anger'."

    "You treat any autistic who disagrees with you as worthless, but your view of your kid is different? Do you 'pity him', too?"

    Keep going David, you're sounding more like the David who made the vile comment about my son.

    If you want to make a valid argument, stick to the truth and the facts.
    Oh but you have to rely on implications, huge presumptions and lies because without these, you have no argument.
    And bringing the subject of chelation up, has nothing to do with this topic.
    But for your information, I am not chelating my son.

    My son has my support and my unconditional love and he knows it.
    I do not deny his disability and I have fought for every non biomedical service, intervention and therapy he needs and is benefitting from.

    "As for the comment... don't ask me, because I don't recognise it."

    My question was;
    Did you make that comment about my son?
    A simple yes or no would have been appreciated when I first asked you.
    Could you commit yourself to a simple answer to this simple question now?

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 5:27 AM  

  • Kev;
    Thanks for letting me know you're afraid of me. Sirinath caught your ND moderator in a lie. You can ask him for the details if you like.
    For the record, to dispel another lie, I have stated that I teach my son to fight. I do not punch him. We spar and he learns how to punch and block punches. Males engage in that sort of behavior, Kev.
    One other lie. The only mercury rally I ever spoke at was not attended by any high ranking members of any anti mercury organization.
    And one more, anyone can look up the dates of the last AWARES conference. It was not held in October of last year when you staged your little sham. It doesn't bother me that you like to laugh about this, Kev. Weirdos like you have to amuse yourselves somehow.
    How come no comment on uiing dead children, Kev? Oh sorry, that would be too many lies at one time, wouldn't it.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 5:31 AM  

  • Kev;
    Thanks for the advice. I will consider it and continue to make my own judgements.
    I agree with you on one thing.
    Led Zeppelin!

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 5:44 AM  

  • Kassiane;
    "Leave me the fuck out of this.
    DON'T talk to me about real abuse."

    I wasn't talking to you.
    You did say this though.

    "That might be partly my fault. I kinda sorta DID post that I have child protective services numbers for all 50 states and have no qualms about dialing them..."

    Unless you work for the child protective services, where it would be your duty and responsibility to report any justifiable suspected child abuse, you have no business in saying the above.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 6:16 AM  

  • John Best said: "I once posted on the AutAdvo board that I would never accuse Kev of child abuse since stupidity is not a crime but I think Travis deleted it. So, I'll take this opportunity to send that message to Kev. I apologize if I called you a child abuser, it's not your fault."

    Even when you are pretending to be nice, John, you cannot resist insulting people and dragging them through the mud. You just said Kevin was not a child abuser because he was not responsible for his actions because he was too stupid. So you are not only accusing Kevin of some sort of bad activities you are saying he is not responsible for his actions. That's not an apology or you cleaning up your act and that is not even a bright insult. You are so transparent, Best. You take your shots wherever and whenever you can. Autistic people should sue you for slander, libel and defamation of character. However, everytime you open your mouth or write something doew you defame your own character. You are a class A bully and knucklehead, Best.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 7:27 AM  

  • Best, go sit in the corner and think about what a bad person you are. You have lost the right to human interaction.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 7:37 AM  

  • Kev;
    "A relevant distinction should be made between spanking an autistic child once, for stepping on an infants head, to expressing a considered opinion, making a concious decision to use physical discipline on an autistic child with ADD/ADHD, and justifying this as being preferable and more effective than using medication for these specific conditions.

    Any child psychologist will tell you that consistently hitting any child as a means of discipline, no matter how often or how "timely", will teach that child, by example,
    that violence is acceptable behaviour.
    In the case of children with ADD or ADHD this is particularly bad practice, and ineffective."

    Is this the huge issue you reffered to.
    I am interested in whether you agree with this statement.

    "I reiterate Susan - its not necessary to like, respect or agree with me or anyone else but if you truly want to debate your corner then move away from John - he's really not a good person to hang around with. Just think it over is all I'm saying."

    You are absolutely right on the fact that I can debate my 'corner' away from John, but I respect and agree with his views no matter how bluntly he expresses them.

    I also agree with your opinion that
    "its not necessary to like, respect or agree with me"
    I say the same to you.
    I want to be honest with you.
    While we totally disagree in our fundamental views on autism, that is one thing.
    I am sorry but I find your condescending and patronizing tone, unbearable.
    I sound 'nasty' when I am saying this to you, but I need to get across to you why I say things like "you make my skin crawl".
    I don't enjoy being 'nasty' but this is how you make me feel.

    I began blogging a few months ago and was shocked at just how nasty everyone was being.
    I got my first lesson on how to be sarcastic, bitchy and nasty from Kassiane and her friends.
    I soon realised that being civil and reasonable to anyone who disagrees with you leaves you wide open to suggestions such as Kassianes, who invited everyone to bitch about me for a while.

    This whole autism devide is foul.
    Nodody is really listening to each other, and it's virtually impossible to have a civil debate,
    although credit where credits due, abfh was prepared to listen when I tried to convince her I am not John Best.
    Kevin. You are still saying I am kevin_1000, and I'm not.
    When I begin to make a reasonable believable point on your site, you ban me.
    I don't get indignant when someone is nasty about me but I am disgusted when they say vile comments about autistic children.
    You will never convince me I am wrong to 'side' with John, so lets just leave it at that, can we?

    I sincerely wish the best for your daughter and hope she continues to bring you joy.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 8:01 AM  

  • Lisa: I'm not advocating a "don't ask, don't tell" policy regarding biological parents. Anyone who knows that a child is being abused ought to report it; you'll get no argument from me about that. This post is about groundless accusations made in the heat of nasty debates, not about real abuse. Parents who occasionally spank their kids are not abusing them (under the laws of most countries), even if other methods of discipline might work better. John isn't a child abuser for teaching his son a few boxing moves.

    Jonsmum: I don't know who made the anonymous insulting comment about your son, but it doesn't look to me like anything David would do. Yes, he rants a lot, but when he writes anything on my site (and other blogs), he always signs it, and I have never known him to say anything violent that involved children.

    David clearly answered your question when he wrote, "As for the comment... don't ask me, because I don't recognise it." I would describe that as a clear statement that he does not know anything about it.

    You can choose to believe him or not... but I really think it's much more likely that someone else is to blame.

    By Blogger abfh, at 9:46 AM  

  • Jonsmum said: "My question was; Did you make that comment about my son? A simple yes or no would have been appreciated when I first asked you. Could you commit yourself to a simple answer to this simple question now?"

    For the record I believe Jonsmum is John Best and is a game he is playing to bait and entrap people here. But that is neither here nor there. Whoever this "persona" is he she or it is not to be trusted. Several times the another person is asked a charged question: "Do you confirm or deny this." First of all the questions are meant to entrap. I have observed this person being completely agreeable with others only to turn around and chastise that same person in agreement with John Best.

    It is best not to acknowlege the Jonsmum persona. That character exists only to lull people into a sense of false security so as to create ammunition for John Best to use against them. The behavior of Best (Foresam) and Jonsmum is so coordinated and predictable it is safe to assume they are the same person.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 10:37 AM  

  • Just chuckling about the comment that Srinath "caught" That Forum moderator in a lie. "That Forum moderator" was in actuality simply a regular member of the Forum. They were PMing each other on Srinath's motorcycle forum and Srinath came to the conclusion all on his own about that person being a mod.

    That Forum's real moderator is about as impartial as I've seen anywhere on the Internet. Both sides complain bitterly about the mod "obviously" being on the other side. Truth is, he just has no patience for assholes. People from both sides have been banned for nasty language and personal attacks, not just Srinath and John Best. JB and Srinath were banned for these repeated violations, not for their points of view.

    By Blogger little bo peep, at 12:23 PM  

  • abfh;
    David doesn't always sign after his comments. Particularly on Johns blog.
    He has made several unsigned comments that are obviously his.

    Anonymous said...

    "jonsmum:

    "any mouse;
    I'm sure, as psychologist, David Andrews can think for himself, without being told what to do by you."

    I can, and do. And he doesn't tell me what to do or not, although he actually does 'give a shit' about how you and your lot treat people who don't agree with you.

    My statement previously posted still stands. I can say that I have studied in only real universities (Open, Oulu, Jyväskylä, Leeds, Sheffield, Sheffield Hallam and some others) doing things via the Credit Accumulation and Transfer Scheme, and then - when I moved to Finland, getting into universities here. In the system here, until the new two-tier higher education system (Bologne Agreement), nobody took bachelor degrees, so one would have BA or BSc status (not an unusual thing to see here; instead of saying it, people would give the name of the degree anyway, since they had studied for it, even it it has not been officially awarded... provided that was not their terminal degree: in such cases, the rule was to take the actual paper for it; otherwise, one would be BA or BSc, even in the absence of the paper qualification). This was subject - of course - to their being able to provide evidence to the proper authorities... and that I can do, and have done."

    This comment was one amongst several unsigned comments (obviously by David A) on JBs blog, a few weeks ago.

    I have asked David to tell me he didn't make the comment about my son, countless times and he has commented but not answered my question.

    If someone accused me of saying something extremely offensive, and asked me to deny it, I would deny it immediately. Anyone would.
    David has not even acknowledged my accusation until now, on your blog, where he still has not given me a straight answer.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 12:40 PM  

  • MANDATED REPORTER. MANDATED REPORTER. MANDATED REPORTER. This means that if I know of or suspect child abuse I am LEGALLY REQUIRED to report it. If I don't I could face CRIMINAL CHARGES. Unnertand?

    And you did NOT learn sarcasm on my blog. You came there loaded for bear, as my mother would say, and picked it up way too fast for it to be a novel concept. Assuming the majority of your friends are neurotypical (a fairly logical assumption) and that you went to high school with neurotypicals (again, logical assumption) you'd be well versed in sarcasm LONG before you decided to start snarking at people on my blog.

    By Blogger Kassiane, at 3:06 PM  

  • Any mouse;
    Why would I want to be nice to Kev, a guy who tries to put words in my mouth every chance he gets so he can knock GR through me? I just wanted to set the record straight with him. I can't help it that some overly sensitive moderator wanted to protect poor Kev from hearing the truth about himself.
    You don't see Kev coming back to explain his lies that I exposed, do you? Of course not, because that's what Kev is all about. He thinks he can discredit anyone who helps autistic children and then he hides someplace where he doesn't have to face his adversaries. He's not autistic, he can speak for himself if he's not in hiding so how do you see my putting him in his place as bullying? Andrews shows up and just begs you to pick on him by threatening to send pictures of his groin to you. What does he expect? He's an adult. He can give it but when it comes back to him, he cries "Leave me alone".
    You all want to tell the world it's a terrible thing to help autistic children who can't even talk. Do you expect to be treated nicely by parents who struggle through every day with these kids and would do ANYTHING to help them?
    I've said this many times but we want the same things for our kids that you want for yourselves. If they grow into autistic adults and are not cured, we will be fighting the same battles. Then, you will be happy to have people who won't back down from any fight on your side.
    The autistic people among you really should disassociate yourselves from people like Kev, Kathleen and Joseph who do nothing but try to discredit those who help children. They are a disgrace. After spending lots of time watching their antics, one can come to the conclusion that they are either out of their minds or that they must be professionals who are being paid to spread propaganda to convince people to harm their children by refusing to help them. They certainly don't deserve anyone's respect and they make the rest of you look bad by association.
    Don't help autistic children, yeah right.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 3:09 PM  

  • Kassiane said to John Best: "Assuming the majority of your friends are neurotypical..."

    I assume John Best does not have a great deal of friends. If he did he wouldn't be spending so much time on blogs insulting people. John seems to be seeking negative emotional reinforcement because he lacks a healthy social/emotional life. That's why he spends so much time blogging.

    As for being neurotypical I seriously doubt it. I've discussed this with experts and he is certainly not autistic, but there does seem to be something wrong with him. Grown healthy people do not act the way he does

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 4:45 PM  

  • The autistic people among you really should disassociate yourselves from people like Kev, Kathleen and Joseph who do nothing but try to discredit those who help children.

    I don't discredit individuals. I do criticise the work of others, and they are invited to comment on the criticism. I'm not aware that those whose work I scrutinize help children, but I'm sure they try and think they are.

    I guess you might be referring to your list of quotes. You discredit yourself John. All I do is compile and report.

    By Blogger Joseph, at 5:01 PM  

  • Any mouse;
    I am asking straightforward simple questions and asking for straightforward simple answers.
    This must be something you're not used to.
    None of my questions are "charged" or meant to entrap.
    My response to people is reflected in the way they have approached me.
    This is human nature.
    Haven't you noticed other people being nice, nasty, angry or reasonable. Or do you expect us all to be 'Stepford Bloggers'?

    "The behavior of Best (Foresam) and Jonsmum is so coordinated and predictable it is safe to assume they are the same person."

    Most people know by now that I'm not John Best. You're way behind.

    Why are you so paranoid about my "persona"?
    Are you the person who made the offensive comment about my son?

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 5:14 PM  

  • Any mouse;
    I am asking straightforward simple questions and asking for straightforward simple answers.
    This must be something you're not used to.
    None of my questions are "charged" or meant to entrap.
    My response to people is reflected in the way they have approached me.
    This is human nature.
    Haven't you noticed other people being nice, nasty, angry or reasonable. Or do you expect us all to be 'Stepford Bloggers'?

    "The behavior of Best (Foresam) and Jonsmum is so coordinated and predictable it is safe to assume they are the same person."

    Most people know by now that I'm not John Best. You're way behind.

    Why are you so paranoid about my "persona"?
    Are you the person who made the offensive comment about my son?

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 5:15 PM  

  • Sorry that went in twice.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 5:18 PM  

  • Joe;
    I doubt that any scientists are going to bother with your obnoxious opinions of their work. Doctors who are curing autistic children certainly don't need to be bothered by you telling them they are killing the autistic person. I think you should try walking into some DAN doctor's offices and demand that they stop killing autistic children by curing them. Maybe try holding a picket sign out front. How long do you think it will take before you are taken into protective custody with a net thrown over you?
    As for my quotes, your problem with them just indicates that you need lots of help. If you had a sense of humor, you'd appreciate them more. I know you're more concerned with burning crosses on my stepsons' lawns, bigot.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 5:21 PM  

  • JBJr: "Andrews shows up and just begs you to pick on him by threatening to send pictures of his groin to you."

    Um... I certainly never threatened anything of the sort, as well you know.

    From your wonderfully revealing thread on Kevin's blog where you very seen to be a complete moron:

    QUOTE
    John Best : 13 hours, 14 minutes ago

    Kevin;

    Anonymous said…
    By the way David Andrews was wondering if you wanted a picture of his (I shall use your phrase) “pending testicles”. You really are sick John.
    ENDQUOTE

    QUOTE
    User Gravatar Kev : 13 hours ago

    So you’re admitting that David never actually said what you claimed he did? Thanks for that John :o)
    ENDQUOTE

    QUOTE
    User Gravatar Kev : 10 hours, 39 minutes ago

    “You see for yourself that one of David’s friends relayed his thoughts. :o)”

    No John, what I see is someone who isn’t David relaying their own thoughts. I then further see you attributing those thoughts to David.
    ENDQUOTE

    JBJr: "After spending lots of time watching their antics, one can come to the conclusion that they are either out of their minds or that they must be professionals who are being paid to spread propaganda to convince people to harm their children by refusing to help them."

    No, John. To come to that conclusion requires a great deal of paranoia and delusion, actually.

    Maybe you made this comment about jonsmum's son; you're certainly capable of trying to make it look like people have said things that they have not in fact said. And to be honest, I would not be surprised if it was you.

    And here you are again, John, stating clearly that other have said what they have not in fact said: "Don't help autistic children, yeah right."

    Nobody has said that. I certainly do not believe it.


    Jonsmum: "As for 'pitied', I actually said, 'I almost feel sorry for him'"

    That is .. um .. yeh, it's pity.

    "This does not equate to me thinking you, my son or any other autistic person is 'worthless'."

    Pity is based on a significant reduction of the worth of a person in the pitier's mind. Why does Amanda have a shirt saying "Piss on Pity"? Pity is a means used in social comparisons, as a reason for artificially inflation one's own sense of worth. But then, you probably didn't listen during social psychology, did you? If you ever did it...

    Mouse (about JBJr): "I've discussed this with experts and he is certainly not autistic, but there does seem to be something wrong with him."

    Yes. You should have seen the e-mails he sent me whilst he was on AutAdvo. Sick, basically.

    Kassiane (to JBJr): "... you'd be well versed in sarcasm LONG before you decided to start snarking at people on my blog."

    Oh, yes... he absolutely would be. He has a number of posts to his 'credit' in the AutAdvo archives to demonstrate this fact.

    Camille (on reporting abuse): "If a *mandated reporter* has read what Erik Nanstiel has written about the way he treats his daughter, that mandated reporter might very well feel 'mandated' to report Erik Nanstiel for real child abuse. That's dead serious, not snark. I haven't reported anyone to authorities for child abuse, but believe me it has occurred to me that maybe I should. (I'm not a mandated reporter)"

    In the US, I would (as a teacher, evaluator and psychologist) be a mandated reporter, it seems. Erik is certainly lucky that I'm not. As Kassiane says... to not report is a criminal offence for a mandatory reporter (but not, from what I see, for non-mandatory reporters). To be honest, I would probably have to if someone in this country could reasonably be suspected of abuse (provided that 'reasonable' was defined). Not a comfortable feeling to be honest... given the post at the head of this blog.

    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:42 PM  

  • David;
    Feeling sorry for someone does not equate to believing they are a worthless being.
    Why didn't you answer my accusation that you made the offensive comment about my son?
    I am not trying to 'trick' you. I just want you to know that by not denying this, you naturally lead me to assume you said it.
    If you didn't, I sincerely apologise.
    Please don't say "leave me alone",
    this is getting nowhere.
    Please answer my question.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 6:19 PM  

  • Dave;
    If you found some drunken headmaster to hire you as a teacher, I would certainly have to report your penchant for sending pictures of your groin to people. As a parent, that would be my duty to other parents. You have great friends who relay your private quotes, Dave. If you showed up for the interview looking like Aqualung, I wouldn't have to worry.
    It was nice of you to present another example of how Kevin can lie about anything.
    When Joseph says curing autistics is killing them, that's the same as saying don't help them. I know you have some problems with English.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 6:24 PM  

  • Jonsmum: "Feeling sorry for someone does not equate to believing they are a worthless being."

    Jonsmum: "Jonsmum said...

    On ABFH site, on the "one book" post, David N,s reaction to the "Behaviour analyst" had me in stitches; -EDIT- Oh dear, I almost feel sorry for him."

    Just to give you the full context of what you said... 'had you in stitches'? And then you tell me that you were NOT thinking 'worthless being here'? Because the sarcasm is pretty fucking evident there; and that is before I had even had any dealings with you.

    "Why didn't you answer my accusation that you made the offensive comment about my son?"

    Why do you assume that it's okay for you to make sarcastic remarks about me before you have even had any dealings with me? The fact is that those remarks were clearly meant in a demeaning and condescending manner: which is entirely about reducing the inherent value of the person one does it to.

    "I am not trying to 'trick' you. I just want you to know that by not denying this, you naturally lead me to assume you said it."

    Why should I believe you? You have already done the two-faced thing on me already, and big time. Your lack of mention (that you didn't intend that to be a sarcastic remark) to common_sense_needed when s/he said, "Yes, David (pending diploma) is quite a trip... (y)ou should see when he gets really heated... (i)t's a comedy show" could well be seen as intent to demean and devalue me; as could your lack of such a mention to JBJr (when "Fore Sam said... (c)an you imagine taking your kid for treatment and spotting his pending BA hanging on the wall? He probably hand painted it himself in the Special Ed. program") - who was clearly being nasty.

    Incidentally, I had to work fucking hard for what I got from my unniversities, and much of it was done with fuck all support; so such sarcasm on your part was an inappropriate way to talk about me (or did that not bother you... that you could be quite nasty to someone who is autistic - yes, initially very non-verbal - but still managed to do well, despite a total lack of any useful support; just for kicks?). I started out where your son probably did: I said nothing for my first three years; I didn't play with anyone until I was much older and even then it was hard going, so I had no choice but to leave it all alone and do whatever was left for me (which was hang about by myself, looking for interesting things, while everybody else was having a great time being really fucking nasty to me - and incidentally, let me tell you... autism doesn't make people treat an autistic like shit... people let themselves do it, as you may have noticed from your nice little jibe at me that has started a lot of shit off).

    To be honest, you will probably get through your BA (Hons) very nicely and not have to put in the sort of work I had to (autistic+dyslexic+dyspraxic wanting to do well because everybody thoughout my life had said I was 'lazy'). My study was a huge part of what cost me my marriage (there, JBJr, now you got your fucking answer), and it has lead to me being in conflict with the services here because I actually know their job - with regard to how to work with autistics - far better than they do. JBJr will definitely call this 'bleating'. However, I know one thing: I don't hit my kid, and I don't need to.

    "If you didn't, I sincerely apologise."

    "Please don't say 'leave me alone',
    this is getting nowhere."

    "Please answer my question."

    Maybe you should answer mine first: why did you feel it was okay to be so nasty and sarcastic (and demeaning and condescending and, thereby, intending to devalue my existence), and what do you think it says about your likely feelings about your own autistic child? (and I'm not using him as a means to be nasty... this is about what impression you think might be got of you when you openly behave in such a way to someone who is autistic, like your own child).

    Otherwise (and since you said 'please', I shall return the same courtesy), please leave me alone.

    Of course your friend John Best Jr is going to make a fucking mint off ot this post, in terms of his obnoxious behaviour (which is, sadly, par for the course with him... as MANY will readily testify). If you can idly let him do it, then maybe I can be satisfied that you were out to score yet another trick.

    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:02 PM  

  • JBJr: "If you found some drunken headmaster to hire you as a teacher, I would certainly have to report your penchant for sending pictures of your groin to people."

    You're really an ignorant bastard, aren't you?

    You had the obsession with my groin, and you know it. It's all in your very own thread. http://www.kevinleitch.co.uk/wp/?p=360

    David N. Andrews Med (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:08 PM  

  • Now I'm going to bed.

    I've been up for the last 20 nights or so trying to deal with shit left by a hacker, and to get rid of a flu bug that's become a bronchial-asthmatic issue.

    David N. Andrews MEd (Dec 2006)
    Applied Educational Psychologist
    Kotka, Finland

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:10 PM  

  • MANDATED REPORTER;
    If you are legally required to report any suspected child abuse, why do you sheepishly say;

    "That might be partly my fault. I kinda sorta DID post that I have child protective services numbers for all 50 states and have no qualms about dialing them..."

    "qualms about dialing them..."
    or "legally required to report".
    Which is it?

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 7:14 PM  

  • I think you should try walking into some DAN doctor's offices and demand that they stop killing autistic children by curing them.

    You don't get it. There is no reason to believe anyone is curing autistic children. The anti-cure position is philosophical, not opposition to something that is actually going on.

    By Blogger Joseph, at 7:28 PM  

  • Dave;
    You didn't leave crying. That's progress! Congratulations, my therapy is helping you.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 8:12 PM  

  • Joe; Lying about cured children won't make them revert to being autistic.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 8:13 PM  

  • David;
    Your protracted list of your qualifications and the subject of each 'unit', or equivilant in Finland, in reaction to behaviour analyst was quite funny, but at the same time I did feel sorry that you felt it necessary to explain yourself in such detail.
    That is not sarcasm, nor does it mean I think you are worthless or that I am reducing your inherent value as a person.

    "Why should I believe you? You have already done the two-faced thing on me already, and big time."

    I don't think I been two faced about you, any more than you have been two faced about me.
    I want to believe you didn't say that comment about my son but you are making it very hard for me.
    You can't hold me responsible for something common sense needed or John best said.
    I don't hold you responsible for something Kevin Leitch or any mouse has said on the back of one of your comments.

    "Maybe you should answer mine first: why did you feel it was okay to be so nasty and sarcastic (and demeaning and condescending and, thereby, intending to devalue my existence), and what do you think it says about your likely feelings about your own autistic child? (and I'm not using him as a means to be nasty... this is about what impression you think might be got of you when you openly behave in such a way to someone who is autistic, like your own child)"

    I don't think I said anything to devalue your existence, and I think anything I have said about you says nothing about my feelings towards my own autistic child.
    From your comments to me now, I
    think you have over reacted and you are projecting your feelings about the various negative experiences you have suffered in your life, onto me.
    I don't hit my son either by the way.

    "Of course your friend John Best Jr is going to make a fucking mint off ot this post, in terms of his obnoxious behaviour (which is, sadly, par for the course with him... as MANY will readily testify). If you can idly let him do it, then maybe I can be satisfied that you were out to score yet another trick."

    I do not and cannot dictate or influence John in his views comments and opinions of other people.
    It is unfair of you to say that if I idly let him do it, then you can be satisfied I was "out to score yet another trick".
    I don't ask you defend any mouse's comments towards me, or suggest that by idly letting him/her do it, you are scoring another trick.

    I don't blame you for not trusting me.
    After all, while you will not say to me; I didn't make that comment about your son, I cannot trust you.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 8:24 PM  

  • Who said I didn't call?

    That's my job. It's CPS's job to follow up.

    Therefore, the only person who'd know if I called is the person who answered the phone, and the family if they chose to follow up.

    By Blogger Kassiane, at 8:36 PM  

  • Kassiane;
    God help any family who you make any judgements on.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 8:43 PM  

  • Jonsmum; It looks like Andrews is in the same league as leitch when it comes to speaking the truth.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 9:03 PM  

  • John;
    Unfortunately, yes.
    Goodnight. It's 3AM again!

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 9:51 PM  

  • Jonsmum said: "The behavior of Best (Foresam) and Jonsmum is so coordinated and predictable it is safe to assume they are the same person."

    Most people know by now that I'm not John Best. You're way behind.

    I said you were coordinated so that it made no difference. I heard you might actually be named Susan. I don't care. As far as I care you and John are the same person. You certainly have the same agenda. It just turns my stomach to think there might be two people out there with the same poisonous mind.

    At any rate you are a hidden filthy minded blockhead with a lot of stupid ideas and hate just like, John.

    And you do try to entrap people and you are not to be trusted. I don't believe you are outright lying when you say "My questions are not charged and I have no intention of entrapping people." I just assume you are stupid. If in fact, you are Susan then you are severely challenged, both mentally and morally, and not responsible for your actions.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 12:26 AM  

  • Of course, as far as Foresam (why do I think foreskin) and Jonsmum (the very name indicates coordination and a similarity of ideas, I will choose to address them both as John, or in fact the latter not at all. I will hold John Best up as the archetype of evil stupidity.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 12:36 AM  

  • "I will hold John Best up as the archetype of evil stupidity."

    Here's some evidence to be held up with him.


    {...Neurodiversity advocates letting children suffer horribly in the abyss of autism rather than helping them. My Hating Autism blog tells the truth about autism which is really mercury poisoning while exposing Neurodiversity for the sadistic child abusers that they are. ...}

    Posted by: John Best | May 14, 2006 11:20 AM


    {...I don't think you bunch of child abusers deserve any respect. ...}

    Posted by: John Best | May 14, 2006 12:28 PM


    {...You should be locked up for child abuse for refusing to help your kid. Listening to neurodiverse morons is harmful to your child's health. ...}

    Posted by: John Best | May 15, 2006 09:24 AM


    {...I think you should hang yourself, you'd be better off. ...}

    Posted by: John Best | May 16, 2006 09:39 AM


    All from a single comments thread.

    By Anonymous Batgirl, at 1:02 AM  

  • It boggles the mind, doesn't it, Batgirl. And now I understand that Mr. Best is trying to volunteer for a decision making position over these same people whom he has, across the board, insulted and said were better off dead. I get the feeling if he does get such a position he will not suddenly change and the people he works for will be in trouble.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 1:21 AM  

  • Jonsmum said: "I don't think I been two faced about you, any more than you have been two faced about me. I want to believe you didn't say that comment about my son but you are making it very hard for me. You can't hold me responsible for something common sense needed or John best said. I don't hold you responsible for something Kevin Leitch or any mouse has said on the back of one of your comments."

    Do not believe any of the above.

    This personna is not only two faced it is lieing and vicious. It will discuss quite calm, rationally and politely with a person within a string in an attempt to draw out personal information from that person and then it will discuss with Foresam (John Best or Foreskin, interchangeable) within the same string how sad that person is or innapropriate that person has been. Jonsmum's comments to anyone who identifies themselves with neurodiverse or sides with any ideas associated with autistic people/adults are meant to discredit and hurt. If John best and Jonsmum are two people then they are two people with one agenda, and that agenda is to abuse and hurt autistic people. They are two bullies and they consider these blogs their playground.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 2:52 AM  

  • Any Mouse;
    Bullying people who lie about the facts that help autistic children recover from mercury poisoning is a good thing. Of course, you can not bully anyone from behind a computer. You can only bully their deranged ideas. If these people who put forth these dangerous lies that try to hide the truth about how children are being cured had half a brain, they would be able to defend their position. They can't do that because they are wrong. The fact that I show them to be wrong can not really be called bullying, it is simple exposing their lies. The fact that the liars like Kathleen, Kev and Joseph have sucked the rest of you into playing their little game where some of you have your feelings hurt should tell you that this game of propaganda is over your heads. You should go back to taking care of your children as well as you can and leave the propaganda to these Bozos and those of us who will expose their garbage for what it is.
    Kevin and Kathleen do not allow those of us who know that they are liars to comment on their sites because they can not bluff their way around our comments. Joseph thinks he's the most intelligent person in the world so he tries to refute the truth but he has not lined up those 75 year olds that he needs to prove his idiotic theories. He'll probably ban opposing comments soon too.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 5:26 AM  

  • "n the case of children with ADD or ADHD this is particularly bad practice, and ineffective."

    I entirely agree with you. I'm not trying to absolve anyone. However, you are attempting to absolve John of the exact same behaviour you accuse SBM of. That's duplicitous. No matter how often he protests about 'liars' the truth is that John has said several times that he hits his autistic son.

    "You are absolutely right on the fact that I can debate my 'corner' away from John, but I respect and agree with his views no matter how bluntly he expresses them."

    You agree with all his views? Clearly you do not. You class SBM behaviour as abusive but John's exact same behaviour as fine. Which is true?

    Do you agree with John that homosexuality is a perversion? Do you agree with John that autism was invented by Eli Lily in 1931? Do you agree with John that all people who don't chelate their autistic kids are child abusers? Do you agree with John that it is OK to intimidate women by threatening to phone them at their homes? Or to encourage other men to do the same thing? Do you agree with John that last years AWARES conference (see link I provided which contains link to 2005 conference) was staged so we could harvest his quotes? Do you believe that there was no autism in China prior to 1999?

    "I am sorry but I find your condescending and patronizing tone, unbearable. I sound 'nasty' when I am saying this to you, but I need to get across to you why I say things like "you make my skin crawl". I don't enjoy being 'nasty' but this is how you make me feel."

    My first knowledge of your existence was you referring to everyone who didn't agree with you as 'wankers'. I think you kind of set the tone there, don't you? I've been blogging for three years and although the likes of John might like to bleat about how 'we' are afraid to debate him, the sad truth is that its boring having the same old conversation. Its been established that John is wrong about so many things and yet the next time the subject comes up he goes straight back to the same old points. Sometimes even after he's admitted he's wrong. I ask in all seriousness - what's the point of debating with someone like that?

    "I soon realised that being civil and reasonable to anyone who disagrees with you leaves you wide open to suggestions such as Kassianes, who invited everyone to bitch about me for a while."

    Whereas my first introduction to the mercury boys and girls was some brave soul anonymously emailing me telling me to have 'my fucking retard bitch' of a daughter 'put down'. I wish I'd kept that mail but frankly I was to shocked to even consider not deleting it. It came from a maillist that John was a vocal member of. I can't definitively say it was John who sent me that but his subsequent output certainly indicates it was. He's certainly had no qualms about insulting my daughter since then. Once when i was describing how accomplished she was on the computer he compared her to a trained monkey. When I protested he said he'd send me some bananas for her. So you'll forgive me if I find this:

    I don't get indignant when someone is nasty about me but I am disgusted when they say vile comments about autistic children.
    You will never convince me I am wrong to 'side' with John, so lets just leave it at that, can we?


    very hard to understand. You are siding with someone who is frequently vile about autistic children.

    I am not trying to say you are 'wrong' to side with Jon, I leave that to you to decide. I simply want to illustrate to you that the points you hold up as being deplorable are traits that John frequently displays.

    "Nodody is really listening to each other, and it's virtually impossible to have a civil debate,"

    It's bad but not impossible. Maria Lujan (who is a Mum from Argentina who believes MMR harmed her autistic son) is a good person who I consider a friend. I have lots of time and respect for her. Conversely, John thinks she's a figment of someone's imagination.

    I'm deadly serious Susan - John is corrosive. He is solely responsible for 90% of the bad feeling.

    "Kevin. You are still saying I am kevin_1000, and I'm not.
    When I begin to make a reasonable believable point on your site, you ban me."


    The IP address for Susan lord, jonsmum and kevin_1000 are exactly the same. It originates from a residential block i.e. one home, one PC. You either are the same person or you share a home/PC. If you're not the same person I apologise.

    As for a reasonable point, you started off by calling everyone who disagrees with you as 'wankers'. When I asked you to clarify, you didn't and just slung attitude back at me. I'm bored of dealing with that. I'll happily reinstate you if you are happy to be polite and on topic. the only people who've been banned are those who can't be polite or stay on topic.

    "I sincerely wish the best for your daughter and hope she continues to bring you joy."

    Thank you very much. I wish nothing but the same back to you too.

    By Blogger Kev, at 6:37 AM  

  • FS:Kevin and Kathleen do not allow those of us who know that they are liars to comment on their sites because they can not bluff their way around our comments.

    John, you've had ample opportunity to present an intelligent argument on those blogs and you have consistently failed. As I understand it, you aren't banned from commenting because you are posting incontrovertible evidence, you've been banned because you are simply incapable of engaging in civil exchange of ideas.

    You are angry because your son isn't all you'd hoped for and you blame vaccine manufacturers and the government. When your attempts to present anything with a hint of scientific merit are swatted down by people who actually understand the science, you lash out with verbal abuse. You are a bully and that's bullying, be it in person or from behind a computer.

    If you don't think words qualify as threats, I defy you to write a threatening letter to your commander in chief.

    At your core, autistic child or not, you are not a nice person. You are not a good person. Your anger and need to blame others for events beyond your control have exposed your true nature but your son's autism didn't make you this way.

    I think on some level you realize that your son isn't mercury toxic and neither are any other autistics. All of this bluster is a manifestation of your deep denial and your struggle to reconcile your beliefs with the evidence at hand.

    By Blogger notmercury, at 8:42 AM  

  • Foresam;;
    You really ought to consider weighing the potential returns on
    #1 Continuing on with your anti-mercury nonsense lawsuit
    #2 Rounding up all the good people who led you down the primrose path, and hold them accountable for all the lost time, treatment dollars, and emotional damage they've done to you and potentially to your family.
    You've got plenty of evidence of damage out there with your esteemed influencers named over and over. If you got a good attorney, I think you'd have a good case. You claim to be a smart bettor. Are you unable to see the odds difference between 1 and 2 for a decent payout? It seems you prefer a 600:1 over a decent 10:1

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:29 AM  

  • NM; LOL, one can not present any kind of argument when they are not allowed to comment. You keep dreaming that you swatted down anything I said. None of you are willing to discuss the politics involved, without which, you can not understand the corrupt "science".
    How many cured kids have you talked to to determine that they are still brain damaged to support your claim that chelation does not work?

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 1:24 PM  

  • I've never prevented you from commenting on my blog but you haven't made any intelligent or convincing arguments.

    I'm afraid you can't hide behind allegations of censorship and conspiracies forever. At some point you will be forced to admit that there isn't any evidence there either.

    In your book, corrupt science is any that doesn't show a connection between thimerosal and autism, so essentially you are saying that 99.999999+% of science is corrupt no matter where and by whom it's performed.

    I thought you were supposed to understand odds as a handicapper.

    FS Said: How many cured kids have you talked to to determine that they are still brain damaged to support your claim that chelation does not work?

    Again, you really need to work on sentence structure if you wish to ask questions that can be answered.

    By Blogger notmercury, at 2:57 PM  

  • NM;
    I asked you a bunch of questions on your blog and all you gave me for answers were insults. Maybe you could just explain how all those kids in that Chicago practice that doesn't vaccinate don't have any autism? A science wizard like you should at least be able to make an educated guess.
    Can you answer the question here also instead of criticizing my sentence structure? That's not a very good dodge. You'll never make it as a politician.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 4:11 PM  

  • Kev;
    You have asked a lot of questions.
    I cannot comment on anything you ask that I know nothing about, but I will try and answer most of your questions.
    Firstly, my main concern/priority is my son. As I said to David Andrews, I have fought for every service, provision, and non-biomedical intervention for him, uncluding the biggest hurdle of all, getting him into a special needs school.
    You know my name you have probably read my "letter from sickened mother" to Katie Grant. I also wrote to her society of authors, her publishers, the Sunday Times Scotland, the national library of childrens books and major book stores selling her childrens books. You will know that I have strong views about issues surrounding autism.

    As well as all the evidence linking autism to thimerosal in vaccines, I have good reason to believe this was the cause of my sons autism. His development stopped dead in it's tracks after his second infant multi vaccination.
    Although I didn't know about thimerosal at that time, I don't believe his regression after vaccination was a coincidence.
    I believed this before I had access to the internet and before I had heard of John Best.
    My view on this will never change.

    As far as agreeing with all of John's views. I have never said I agree with all of his views, but all of his views are not relevant to the important issue here.
    John believes in god. If you or anyone else also believe in god, this doesn't mean you agree with all his views.

    I believe John spars with his son rather than "hits him".
    I believe that in the face of all the evidence showing an unquestionable link between autism and mercury in vaccines, that any parent of an autistic child that would ignore, dismiss or argue against this evidence is irresponsible and negligent.
    I beleive that Eli Lily is/was responsible for bringing about the cause of autism in 1931.

    I don't know what John's views are on most things, but if you're talking about homosexuality, I have friends who are 'gay' and I know they agree with my view that while it is not the 'norm' it is 'natural' to them.
    I do not beleive in God, but I respect everyones choice and religious beliefs.
    Does this not say that I can agree with and have respect for someone who has different opinions to me on other issues? I think this is a good thing.
    I worked for the Salvation Army, in a professional capacity, for 13 years before I had my children.
    I am not a Salvationist but I agree with their ethos.

    "You agree with all his views? Clearly you do not. You class SBM behaviour as abusive but John's exact same behaviour as fine. Which is true?"

    I class SBM's behaviour and attitude to anyone who does not agree with her, as far more abusive than John's.

    "My first knowledge of your existence was you referring to everyone who didn't agree with you as 'wankers'."

    No. What I said to Jim, on your site was;
    "Don't let the ignorant bastards get you down."
    You know that is an English phrase.
    I added the "ignorant" as a reference to everyone commenting on that thread who I saw as "ignorant bastards", who were foaming at the mouth's at the legal kicking Dr Geier got. This was the "tone" that was already set on your blog. It had nothing to do with whether they agreed with me or not. That was my first comment. I had not expressed any opinions for anyone to agree or disagree with. My comment was also meant as a jesture of support for Jim, who in my opinion, was spot on.

    "Whereas my first introduction to the mercury boys and girls was some brave soul anonymously emailing me telling me to have 'my fucking retard bitch' of a daughter 'put down'."

    That e-mail was/is disgusting. This sort of thing is abhorrent to me. You should have kept it and displayed it on your site as an example of how there are evil bastards out there.

    Like you said you can't definitively say it was John who sent you that, and I don't believe he would do that to anyone. I don't agree with you that he is vile about autistic children.

    You think John is "corrosive".
    Despite his brusque and sometimes overtly offensive veneer, I think he is a good man, dedicated in his belief that thimerosal caused his and other childrens autism.

    The insidious, condescending hypocritical, passive agressive blogs and bloggers are far more offensive to me. They sicken me.

    Lets not pretend this "autism devide" doesn't bring out the worst in all of us, uncluding me, because it does. It also attracts people who made the sick comment about your daughter and the sick comment about my son, and this is what's responsible for the "bad feeling"

    Kevin_100 have the IP address but we are not the same person and we don't "share" a computer. Yes we do share a house and I have used his computer a few times.
    This only proves we have the same views, although Kevin is probably more outspoken than me. It's no big revelation, just one more person who agrees with John Best.

    "I'll happily reinstate you if you are happy to be polite and on topic. the only people who've been banned are those who can't be polite or stay on topic."

    Seriously, no offence but I really do think that it is nigh on impossible to have a polite debate on such a serious issue, between people with such passionate opposing views.

    Kevin, if you haven't already done so, dump the vallergan and get some melatonin from your paediatrician. It's natural, and far more effective.

    Again, I wish Megan all the happiness in the world.

    Susan.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 4:34 PM  

  • Kev;
    I did not send the Email you referenced.
    I don't think I ever saw your blog until after your phony Awares conference.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 4:59 PM  

  • FS:I asked you a bunch of questions on your blog and all you gave me for answers were insults.

    That's terrible. You deserve more respect. Can you point out my insults or at least the parts you found to be insulting?

    re questions: List them here or on my blog and I'll do my best to answer each of them, assuming they are intelligible. Your questions don't make any sense when they include so many unknown variables.

    example: How many hydrogen powered vehicles have you driven to determine that they contribute to solar flares to support your claim that time travel does not work?

    By Blogger notmercury, at 5:42 PM  

  • Kev;
    Here is a good example of the condescending, passive aggressive comments that sicken me.

    "I assume John Best does not have a great deal of friends. If he did he wouldn't be spending so much time on blogs insulting people. John seems to be seeking negative emotional reinforcement because he lacks a healthy social/emotional life. That's why he spends so much time blogging.

    As for being neurotypical I seriously doubt it. I've discussed this with experts and he is certainly not autistic, but there does seem to be something wrong with him. Grown healthy people do not act the way he does "

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 6:17 PM  

  • NM;
    You're just proving my point. Thank you.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 6:18 PM  

  • any mouse;
    You're a nasty piece of work.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 6:20 PM  

  • John;
    What's this about a phony Awares conference to "harvest" quotes from you?

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 6:49 PM  

  • Any Mouse is not worth replying to with his, her or its' idiocy. It's jealous that I have time to play golf and only have to work an hour or so a day.
    Jonsmum;
    Kev and his pals staged a phony Awares conference last year. Kev made a couple of errors to tip me off that it was a sham. Frank Klein admitted it was a sham after I figured it out. Kev took the quotes from me out of context, as usual, to display on his blog as a means to knock GR. It was just his typical attempt at character assassination since he could not refute any of my arguments.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 7:25 PM  

  • *golf clap*

    Great thread ABFH. A true model of how to moderate a discussion into something worthwhile.

    In that light, I was wondering how best to start a rambling flamewar and then hit autopilot to allow the finest in trolldom a voice to feign concern for the worthy theme behind the title of this post, to insult without reproach, and to espouse paranoia and extremism.

    ABFH - any ideas?

    btw, holy crap, did Rescue Angel really just say that the AWARES conference is fake? This insult and black helicopter-laden thread/treadmill just keeps getting better.

    By Anonymous Flamewar Mentoring Needed, at 10:09 PM  

  • John Best does not reply to my posts because I am getting too close to the truth when I say things like:

    1. "John Best has few friends because if he did he would spend less time abusing autistic people."

    2. "John Best has no full time job because no one will hire him."

    3. "John Best has been doing this for so long without break or apology in the face of logic and opposition that he is most likely earning a percentage from cheation kits sold to scared and ignorant parents of autistic children (made more ignorant by Best's Scare tactics)

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 1:10 AM  

  • I said: "John Best (Foresam) and Jonsmum are two(personnas) with one agenda, and that agenda is to abuse and hurt autistic people. They are two bullies and they consider these blogs their playground." and Jonsmum said: "any mouse; You're a nasty piece of work."

    But who is the nasty piece of work really. You two are the bullies and the marketers of hate disinformation and chelation kits. You don't respond or deny these accusations. By your own arguments when you accuse people of things and ask for a response by giving no response you MUST be guilty.

    Look, the arguments presented here for mercury poisoning being the cause of autism and chelation being necessary are powerful. John best uses viceral, emotionally charged language. John Best's arguments are based on fear, hatred and ignorance. Don't get me wrong here. I think fear hatred and ignorance are very effective sales tools. It has been shown that in any discussion what people will most commonly remember is not the long rational explanations but the few shocking visceral moments. Jerry Springer is a fine example of the success of John Best's technique. So Best, in going from blog to blog, is probably doing quite well in stimulating sales of chelation kits among scared ignorant parents of autistic children.

    The most dreadful thing is that chelation is potentially lethal with people who are not mercury poisonned. And he tries to encourage chelation without appropriate proof of mercury poisoning.

    Now the interesting thing is that all the people with rational and reasonable things to say about raising autistic children are autistic adults. Of course, because autistic adults have been autistic children and understand autistic children they are the best resourses for helping to raise autistic children so they can acheive their full potential. A successful capable autistic adult is a threat to John Best's cause. So John Best's second agenda here is to jibe and insult autistic adults until he angers them and brings them down to his level. Then he can discredit them effectively.

    The question is: should he be allowed to do this?

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 4:37 AM  

  • Any Mouse;
    You found me out. I'm a salesman for Chelation Inc.. I've had hundreds of people who contacted me privately who bought chelation kits. They saw the light and left the neurodiverse philosophy.
    I figured they were gullible so I doubled the price on the kits I sold them. They are all normal now and do not want to revert to being autistic. I have a sale going on right now but you have to order your kit by midnight tonight.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 5:39 AM  

  • any mouse;

    "Look, the arguments presented here for mercury poisoning being the cause of autism and chelation being necessary are powerful."

    What "arguments" are you refering to?
    Give us a quote.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 6:17 AM  

  • "As far as agreeing with all of John's views. I have never said I agree with all of his views, but all of his views are not relevant to the important issue here."

    I'm afraid they do have some relevance. You have said that John is 'forceful' in his views and how he expresses them. You have equally said that other peoples forceful views sicken you.

    John's 'forecful' views include the one that any parent of an autistic child not using chelation is a child abuser. I'll happily link to that if you want me to, or you could ask John yourself. Are you chelating your son?

    You have also made reference to how difficult it is to debate the issues we have. You're right it is. It is attitudes such as John's that make it so difficult. John is not forceful, he is simply abusive when his facts are shown to be in error. Even after he admits his error he still carries on resorting to abuse. Please don't think that he is merely responding to how we approach him. He is not. My first knowledge of him was the above reference to anyone not chelating being a child abuser.

    "I believe John spars with his son rather than "hits him"."

    I'm sure thats what John would like you to think. However, in those terms he has stated he teaches his son how to fight, not spar. In terms of punishment he has stated on numerous ocassions that he smacks his son. You weren't to know this so its only natural you would defend John and castigate SBM and John is inherently too dishonest to tell you himself.

    "I believe that in the face of all the evidence showing an unquestionable link between autism and mercury in vaccines, that any parent of an autistic child that would ignore, dismiss or argue against this evidence is irresponsible and negligent."

    There is no evidence at all. Feel free to cite it if you believe otherwise. I believe that parents who allow their children to be chelated with no evidence to support mercury/metal poisoning are irresponsible and negligent.

    "I class SBM's behaviour and attitude to anyone who does not agree with her, as far more abusive than John's."

    Maybe so, but we were talking about the issue of smacking, not agreement.

    ""Don't let the ignorant bastards get you down."

    That's true, you did. I apologise.

    "My comment was also meant as a jesture of support for Jim, who in my opinion, was spot on."

    It would've been better for you to express that support without referring to people as 'bastards' don't you think? that would've allowed us to start a civil debate. I further gave you plenty of opportunity to expand on your statement which you did not.

    "Like you said you can't definitively say it was John who sent you that, and I don't believe he would do that to anyone."

    I believe he definitely would. Anyone who thinks its OK to sic grown men onto women in their own homes, or threaten to do the same themselves is a big enough coward to behave liken that.

    "I don't agree with you that he is vile about autistic children."

    You think its OK to compare an autistic child to a trained monkey? You think its OK to make references to an autistic child as a trained monkey? I guess we have differing views of 'vile' then. As far as I know John is the only person who has stooped low enough to insult children. If ever John and I come face to face I will take great pleasure in explaining to him in painstaking detail exactly how offensive and cowardly I find making jokes about an autistic 6 year old to be.

    "Despite his brusque and sometimes overtly offensive veneer, I think he is a good man, dedicated in his belief that thimerosal caused his and other childrens autism."

    And yet you think others who don't believe in what you and John believe are vile and sickening when they are offensive? Don't you think that's a double standard? With John, its not a veneer.

    "Seriously, no offence but I really do think that it is nigh on impossible to have a polite debate on such a serious issue, between people with such passionate opposing views."

    No, its not. I've told you about Maria. There've been plenty of commenters at my blog who I feel respect for. David H is another one. We might not agree but we can be polite and respectful to each other. John cannot be polite and respectful thus its impossible to debate him. He's also elected to remain ignorant and disagree with himself - he's intellectually dishonest and lazy.

    "Kevin, if you haven't already done so, dump the vallergan and get some melatonin from your paediatrician. It's natural, and far more effective."

    No offence, but if you read my blog for yourself instead of relying on John and Matthew Pearson to give you edited, skewed highlights you'd find our trial with Vallergan was short lived.

    I don't pretend to understand why you are so desperate to absolve John of things he clearly is responsible for, or why you feel that his appalling behaviour is OK whilst another's allegedly appalling behaviour is not but its your right to ally yourself with whomever you wish to.

    If you ever want to have a constructive exchange of views about your thiomersal beliefs then I'll happily lift your posting restrictions. I'm always happy to give people a chance. John had lots of chances and abused them all. You're not John so I'm happy to try again.

    By Blogger Kev, at 8:32 AM  

  • To the anonymous person who complained that I wasn't moderating my blog: My readers always have been free to comment here without their views being censored. If you want a moderated blog, buddy, then write your own.

    And John, you really are getting ridiculous with your accusations: We all have better things to do than stage phony conferences to make you look foolish. You're quite capable of doing that without any help.

    By Blogger abfh, at 9:33 AM  

  • Kev;

    "I don't pretend to understand why you are so desperate to absolve John of things he clearly is responsible for, or why you feel that his appalling behaviour is OK whilst another's allegedly appalling behaviour is not but its your right to ally yourself with whomever you wish to."

    Equally, I don't pretend to understand why you are so desperate to convince me John is "corrosive".
    You're wasting your time.

    I'm not desperate to absolve John.
    He doesn't need any absolution from me or anyone else.
    You are pushing the issue of why I choose to 'ally' myself with him.
    You've asked me a host of questions about this, and I think i've been more than accomodating in trying to answer them.
    I have given a lot of personal information about myself, when most people hide behind anonymity
    while they accuse and abuse other people, ANY MOUSE.

    All of John's views, unrelated to the subject of autism are not relevant in any debate about autism.

    "I'm afraid they do have some relevance. You have said that John is 'forceful' in his views and how he expresses them. You have equally said that other peoples forceful views sicken you."

    What I said was this;

    The insidious, condescending hypocritical, passive agressive blogs and bloggers are far more offensive to me. They sicken me."

    You can see I didn't use the word "forceful".
    This is my whole point.
    Passive aggression is worse than overt aggression, which doesn't use the pretence of being 'civil' and 'reasonable', while being equally or more aggresive and offensive.

    I don't rely on John and Matthew Pearson to give me edited, skewed highlights of your blog.
    I read it myself. Along with other blogs that I don't comment on.
    My comment about vallergan was not meant as a jibe.

    If I ever want to have a constructive exchange of views about my thiomersal beliefs with you I'll let you know, but for now, I think it would be more destructive than constructive.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 11:19 AM  

  • "Equally, I don't pretend to understand why you are so desperate to convince me John is "corrosive". You're wasting your time."

    I'm not trying to convince you of anything Susan. I'm simply opining.

    "I'm not desperate to absolve John."

    In my opinion, you are. I think you realise what a truly odious human being John is (ask your gay friends if they feel they are perverts or if they are on a par with rapists and child molesters) and you are (justifiably) ashamed of associating with him. I can understand that. I can also understand that you share similar beliefs about autism and thiomersal and feel a connection. I think however, that you are a vastly better person than John and you deserve better than to be associated with someone who is quite clearly not all there.

    "You are pushing the issue of why I choose to 'ally' myself with him."

    I'm very curious its true. There are lots of people who share John's thiomersal/autism beliefs who aren't as revolting a specimen of humanity as John. I find it fascinating that you choose to ignore what I'm sure you know are very worrying traits and behaviours on John's part in order to ally yourself with him when there are much nicer, more rational, saner and amenable people around.

    "I have given a lot of personal information about myself, when most people hide behind anonymity while they accuse and abuse other people, ANY MOUSE."

    Well, there's not a lot I can do about other people posting anonymously. I'd also suggest that until this moment the fact that you've posted in various places under various user names indicates a propensity for anonymity yourself, no?

    "All of John's views, unrelated to the subject of autism are not relevant in any debate about autism."

    "he insidious, condescending hypocritical, passive agressive blogs and bloggers are far more offensive to me. They sicken me."

    "You can see I didn't use the word "forceful". This is my whole point."

    I think thats a little bit dishonest with all due respect. You say John's attitudes in all matters not related to autism are irrelevant but other peoples aren't? John also has a bad attitude to autistic people, many of whom he has castigated, insulted and degraded on his site, including my children. An action you claim is vile, but only in people other than John it seems.

    "I don't rely on John and Matthew Pearson to give me edited, skewed highlights of your blog. I read it myself. Along with other blogs that I don't comment on."

    And yet you managed to miss all sections about medication save that one?

    "My comment about vallergan was not meant as a jibe."

    And nor did I take it as such. I appreciate the advice. Seriously.

    "If I ever want to have a constructive exchange of views about my thiomersal beliefs with you I'll let you know, but for now, I think it would be more destructive than constructive."

    You'll be welcome.

    By Blogger Kev, at 11:49 AM  

  • Kev;
    Just one last point I feel I have to make before we part company.
    I haven't posted in various places under various names. I don't know why you think this.
    I've posted as jonsmum as a blogger name and i've posted as Susan Lord, (my real name).
    I've commented to you here as jonsmum and signed my comment as, Susan, thus pointing out that "jonsmum" is "Susan Lord".
    I can't be any less anonymous than that.
    If you think i've commented anywhere else under a different identity, I can hand on heart assure you, I haven't.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 1:07 PM  

  • John Best said:
    "You found me out. I'm a salesman for Chelation Inc.. I've had hundreds of people who contacted me privately who bought chelation kits. They saw the light and left the neurodiverse philosophy.
    I figured they were gullible so I doubled the price on the kits I sold them. They are all normal now and do not want to revert to being autistic. I have a sale going on right now but you have to order your kit by midnight tonight."

    You may think other people think you're joking about this, John. But the pragmatics of the argument actually make sense. Considering the amount of time and the effort you spend doing this if there is no return for you then you are a complete idiot. So there you go, John. You are either an idiot or a monster. Which do you prefer? I prefer to see you as both.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 4:04 PM  

  • Kev;
    You are going to have to take a refresher course in propaganda. You gave me a good laugh though.:o) Will you be hiding behind your wife's dress if we meet so you can explain how offensive I was to provoke you into calling your own daughter a monkey? Or should I take this as a threat?
    All of this character assassination means you are losing Kev. It's good to know I'm that much of a threat to you that you have to ban me from your blog and follow me around to bash me. :o)

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 6:07 PM  

  • Any Mouse;
    I guess I'm a rich idiot from all the neurodiverse I cured. You have less than 6 hours before the sale ends. Order your kit now before the price goes up.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 6:09 PM  

  • So you are trying to say you recieve nothing from promoting chelation and abusing autistic adults? But you have done this for years with no apparent return. So you are not only a monster but a stupid monster.

    However, I believe you recieve SOMETHING. Is it monetary or something like a mistaken sense of superiority. Or are you just lashing out at autism in general because you didn't get your idea of a perfect son. I have news for you, John. Nobody's perfect. Not even you. You seem to be as imperfect as they come.

    If you were abused as a child that may explain your behavior here. It does not excuse it.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 2:10 AM  

  • John Best said to Kevin. "It's good to know I'm that much of a threat to you that you have to ban me from your blog and follow me around to bash me. :o)"

    Your incredible, John. You are here on an autistic person's blog insulting autistic people left and right, always throwing in references to chelation as if: if people chelate themselves we will gain your approval and you will stop abusing us. I have news for you, John. We don't need or want your approval. Your approval would be a bad thing.

    But the point is: Kev is not following you around. YOU are the interloper here.

    By Anonymous any mouse, at 2:27 AM  

  • Any Mouse;
    I talk about chelation in many places where I see that people have received bad information. Some of those people paid attention and are now watching their kids recover. I don't want any thanks, credit or cash. I just hope parents get back the kid they had before mercury screwed up their brains. It's a shame that you adults have to count on your own fried brains to think for you. I'm sure your parents would like to see you all free of your disabilities.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 2:05 PM  

  • John Best said: "It's a shame that you adults have to count on your own fried brains to think for you."


    Wow! You almost made it. The rest of the quote (although I believe it to be a blatant lie) was well stated and respectful. You could fool almost anyone who didn't know you. But you had to throw in the little bit of vile hatred, the insult which comes from your contempt for autistic people. You will never get that position in NH. Your lack of an open mind will be your demise. I'm not going to be hipocritical and say I hope you improve. I dislike you, and in my experience I have yet to see a bad person turn good. Sadly.

    By the way, John, I am not autistic, though I do identify myself with the neurodiverse. A lot of us are pretty bright with our own brand of "difference". As for you, yes, you are also neurodiverse, although you deny it, because a normal person would not be such an evil bastard as you are towards autistic people. You definitely have problems.

    Bye bye, John.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 3:30 PM  

  • Mouse;
    Anyone who agrees that curing autism is akin to killing the autistic person has a fried brain. No sane person will disagree with that. I guess that tells us the condition of your brain.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 4:20 PM  

  • Where did that come from? I never mentioned killing autistic people. YOU just brought it up. I suppose that shows the condition of your brain.

    I.E. My brain is fine. Yours is twisted and dangerous. I will avoid you.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 4:51 PM  

  • What I have said is chelation is potentially lethal. You are the one pushing chelation.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 4:55 PM  

  • Mouse, Chelation is absolutely safe. Malpractice killed a child. It had nothing to do with proper chelation.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 7:32 PM  

  • Mouse: I think you're right about the mistaken sense of superiority. There's no way a professional salesman could be so inept.

    John: The first rule of sales is to tailor your message to what your audience wants to hear. When you're talking to a group of people who are blogging for more respectful treatment, it might be a good idea to use respectful language, if you want to be seen as anything other than a jerk.

    (not holding my breath waiting for the lightbulb to go on)

    By Blogger abfh, at 7:38 PM  

  • Abfh,

    If John sells chelation kits (and he certainly does whether he claims to get money for them or not) then he is appealing to the lowest common denominator. That would mean Jerry Springer, trailor park people with autistic kids who are not willing or able to look at a sensible argument. For that target group I believe he would be very successful. Certainly he has no rational arguments for chelation, therefor he does not want to appeal to intelligent sensible people. He says sarcastically that people contact him to find out how to get chelation kits. But they very probably do. The sarcasm probably comes from the fact that he is not rich from this. But he is probably unskilled and incapable of doing anything else.

    Now as for the abuse he gives out it is pretty clear that people who give abuse seek abuse because of a low self image. Probably because they have recieved abuse in childhood. But this does not excuse Best. He is a marginally intelligent man who has chosen his path.

    As for myself and my treatment of Best I admit it is Catharsis. Best does represent for me all that is wrong with the world, all the bad attitudes and all the stupid bullies that taunted me in school. It amazes me that people like Best can exist. I would like to believe he is divorced and unemployed and scared and self hating living in squalor, but his life situation makes no difference to me. The only benefit (or detriment) that I get from Best existing is that Best serves as a bad example. Interesting his name should be "Best" because a more appropriate name would be "Worst". But John is for me right now like that clown faced punching bag which I had when I was a kid. Hit it and it just bounces back up, saying:

    "I'm a bastard and an idiot. Hit me again!"

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 3:47 AM  

  • ABFH;
    You're not blogging for respectful treatment. You blog against curing a horrible condition that destroys lives.
    I don't think the lightbulb is coming on in your head until you realize that those of us trying to help our children will also have to demand respect for them if we are not 100% successful.
    We're on the same team here, dear. You are forcing people like me to disrespect when you tell us to let our children suffer.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 7:45 AM  

  • Best,

    You are intentionally missing the point.

    Points missed:

    1. "You're not blogging for respectful treatment."

    All people deserve respectful treatment. Even you, if you choose to join the human race.

    2. "You blog against curing a horrible condition that destroys lives."

    Yet it is the people who have this "horrible condition" who are aking for human respect, which you fail to give. The thing that really messes up yor arguments is these people with autism who are "untreated" supposed to be like vegetables by your arguments are writers, teachers, professors, musicians, businessmen. There is no "brain damage" here, John. There is difference, which you again fail to recognize as having value.

    3. Mercury does not cause autism and chelation does not "cure" it.

    4. "You are forcing people like me to disrespect when you tell us to let our children suffer."


    Nobody is "forcing you" to be disrespectful when they ask for human respect. You choose to be disrespectful.

    However, when I say: "It amazes me that people like Best can exist." or "The only benefit (or detriment) that I get from Best existing is that Best serves as a bad example." or call you a "clown faced punching bag" I am giving you the opportunity to be disrespectful to me. Yet you ignore me. Why? Because you are afraid of me and would rather incite people who are trying to be polite to you. You are the most twisted, disreputable, lieing piece of human trash I have ever come across.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 10:55 AM  

  • any mouse;
    There are profoundly autistic adults and children. Do you agree?

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 11:44 AM  

  • Mouse;
    People who lie about the fact that mercury causes autism do not deserve the slightest bit of respect.
    Your Asperger's adults have no business including themselves with autistic children who can"t function. They are simply obscuring the issue to the detriment of children. They can all go to hell.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 1:18 PM  

  • Jonsmum asked: "There are profoundly autistic adults and children. Do you agree?"

    Oh, Susan, what are you doing here. Taking your directions from John the Bastard because he is afraid to answer my questions? If you are not one person you certainly are coordinated as one person.

    I have told you many times, you ignorant woman, why I will not answer your question with a direct yes or no. But apparently you are too hopelessly dull to understand what I mean. So I will explain again, but I doubt it will do you any good because you are so willfully retarded you will be unable to read what I write. However, I will write for others who actually can read and maybe they can have a laugh at your expense.

    I don't know what you mean by "profoundly autistic"? I do know that there are some profoundly incapable neurotypical people. "Profoundly incapable" means normal people with extreme stupidity or people with various problems who are not autistic. You and John are, for example, profoundly incapable of seeing other people's points of view.

    As for people who need permanent care like quadrapalegics we are not talking about that, are we? Are we talking about mental health care patients who think they are Napolean Bonapart? No I don't think so.

    I will not name the lists of names of people I know who are both capable and "extremely autistic". That is their business. In the face of prejudiced assholes like yourself I think this is best, but "profoundly autistic" is not a death sentance or the end of the world. I could name for you several people who call themselves "profoundly autistic" and they are all writers and organizers and mathematitions and musicians and protesters and scientists and computer technitians and housewives and husbands and single people. And many of those were severely incapacitated and withdrawn as children. And these autistic adults are wonderful resources for helping your children. A resource you are apparently going out of your way to inflame and discredit.

    So I believe your agenda is against the empowerment of autistic people. I believe by the tone of your questions you would prefer to see all autistic people as incapable people. So I will not answer your baited and moronically stupid question which blanket discounts a whole group of people.

    Would you like to ask it again and I can say again how I will not answer your baited and stupid question, you stupid idiot.

    Go on, ask it again, I dare you, you redundant nasty piece of work.

    By Anonymous any mouse, at 1:38 PM  

  • John, do you deny the fact that you are an idiot. I would like an answer to this question.

    Jonsmum do you deny the fact that you are a nasty lieing piece of work? I would like an answer to this question.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 1:41 PM  

  • any mouse;
    There are profoundly autistic adults and children. Do you agree?

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 2:24 PM  

  • any mouse;
    Yes, I deny your opinion that I am a nasty lieing piece of work.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 2:28 PM  

  • "Yes, I deny your opinion that I am a nasty lieing piece of work."

    How can you deny my opinion? It is my opinion and I hold it. You cannot deny that I think a certain thing. I sincerely believe you are a lieing nasty piece of work.

    I asked you to deny THE FACT that you were a nasty lieing piece of work which you have refused to do. You see, I asked you to directly answer a question which was intentionally baited and meant to trap you.

    Very similar to the questions you ask. Now you should understand why I don't answer your questions. Did I drive the point through your thick head now?

    How do you like being verbally abused. You seemed to think it was ok to do between adults, as if that justified you abusing autistic people on autistic blogs.

    So, is it ok for adults to insult and abuse other adults, you pathetic excuse for a human being?

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 2:52 PM  

  • As for John Best, he is a snake oil salesman.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 3:12 PM  

  • any mouse;
    Unlike you, I do not deny THE FACTS.
    FACTS can be denied, but they remain facts.
    You're opinion that I am a nasty lieing piece of work, is not a fact.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 3:18 PM  

  • Mouse;
    My son has made tremendous gains via chelation. Only an idiot would refuse to give a child that assistance.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 4:04 PM  

  • Jonsmum said: "any mouse; Unlike you, I do not deny THE FACTS. FACTS can be denied, but they remain facts. You're opinion that I am a nasty lieing piece of work, is not a fact."

    This discussion is getting a bit tiresome. Talking to Susan Lord (If indeed such a person exists) is like talking to a brick wall. She is so dull she cannot understand my point. This is the second time I have to explain the same thing to her. I believe she is too slow to grasp any thing mor complex than "See Spot Run."

    First: You cannot deny my opinion, Susan, because the opinion is mine. Do you deny I have the opinion? Then you would be wrong. Anyway, that was not my question.

    Second: I asked you to deny THE FACT that you are a nasty lieing piece of work? This question you did not answer, and rightly so. It is a loaded question. You may well be a nasty lieing piece of work. Evidence on this board and others may show you as baiting people by pretending to be nice to get personal intel on people and then going back to John and using that intel to attack people with. You would be quite right not to address a question phrased "Do you deny the fact that..." A similar question begins "Do you agree that..."

    And, no, you do not need to answer my question. I am honest and my question is unveiled. Your question however is veiled and you are not honest about wanting to entrap people. Therefore the evidence points to you being a lieing, nasty piece of work and I need not ask the question.

    You see how these baited questions get out of hand. Now we are exploring why you are a lieing, nasty vicious piece of work.

    Do you feel good about yourself now? (There is another baited question.)

    As I said that

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 4:36 PM  

  • any mouse;
    Yes, I feel good about myself.
    I don't consider that to be a "baited" question.
    I'm just expecting you to reply with another drawn out, inane rant.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 5:09 PM  

  • any mouse;
    Yes, I feel good about myself.
    I don't consider that to be a "baited" question.
    I'm just expecting you to reply with another drawn out, baseless rant.
    Here's another straightforward unbaited question, I don't expect you will answer.
    Can you give me an example of how, where or when I have lied?

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 5:15 PM  

  • Jonsmum said: "I'm just expecting you to reply with another drawn out, inane rant."

    and then she asked me to show where she had lied.

    Well, I called her a "lieing, nasty vicious piece of work" who used discussion to bait people so she could use their words against them. Well, you said this wasn't true, and then you say "I'm just expecting you to reply with another drawn out, inane rant."

    Therefor you are lieing and baiting me.

    Also, I have insulted you terribly, yet you come off calm and happy. What that says to me is you are always expecting insult and do not take it personally because you are so used to it. It also tells me you are playing a nasty game here with people.

    Well, you wanted evidence and proof. There it is. Or are you still too dull to read.

    At this point the appropriate response from you should be "I'm sorry. You caught me. I will try to improve." But it won't be, because you are an evil narrow minded woman who cant understand autism, autistic adults, or your own child. You are scared and simple and would rather listen to a snake oil salesman because he causes intelligent thought to shut down and appeals to your visceral nature.

    If you had actually read past my insults (which you did not) you would see my arguments against you are quite good. Susan, you should be ashamed of yourself. I tell you this directly because you are too simple to figure it out on your own.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 2:58 AM  

  • any mouse;
    "At this point the appropriate response from you should be "I'm sorry. You caught me. I will try to improve." But it won't be, because you are an evil narrow minded woman who cant understand autism, autistic adults, or your own child."

    Listen to yourself,and ask yourself why I should say "I'm sorry" to you.

    "Also, I have insulted you terribly, yet you come off calm and happy. What that says to me is you are always expecting insult and do not take it personally because you are so used to it. It also tells me you are playing a nasty game here with people.

    Well, you wanted evidence and proof. There it is. Or are you still too dull to read."

    What this says to any reasonable person, is that despite your insults and attempts to bait me,
    I have the ability to be calm, and recognise that while you are "a nasty piece of work" you obviously do not have the capacity to be rational.
    You're anger towards me is overwhelming you, and you are coming across as hostile, aggresive and desperate for an argument or an insult from me, so you can justfy your insults and prejudgement of me.
    I could wipe the floor with you after all you have said to me, but I'm not going to. I honestly don't feel or want to do that.
    Can you understand why?

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 8:18 AM  

  • Jonsmum said: "You're anger towards me is overwhelming you... I could wipe the floor with you after all you have said to me, but I'm not going to."

    There are two points here I should clear up immediately.

    1. My anger is not overwhelming me. Outside of the insults my logic has been impeccable and I have proven you are a (excuse the language) bitch.

    2. You could not "whipe the floor with me". You are just to dull. If you had any brains at all you would not be (excuse the language) "in bed with" that snake oil salesman. But, as the saying goes, we all "make our own beds.

    As for "whiping the floor" with me I suppose you think a few well placed insults about me or my family being autistic would do it. It always seems to be Bests strategy and you apparently are in full support of that snake oil salesman. You probably have the European branch of Best's chelation kits. By the way, how can I buy some of that poison.

    You have, in your anger, revealed your and Best's strategy of angering and discrediting autistic people.

    However, I have been doing to you what Best and you do, in tandem, to autistic people all over the internet. How do you like it, you foul stinking pathetic moronic excuse for a human being.

    NOW you can try to whipe the floor with me :).

    By Anonymous any, at 8:47 AM  

  • any mouse;
    "As for "whiping the floor" with me I suppose you think a few well placed insults about me or my family being autistic would do it."

    I would insult you because you are insulting me. That seems fair, but I would never insult your family or your child, if you have one.
    "Can you understand why?"

    "because you are an evil narrow minded woman who cant understand autism, autistic adults, or your own child."

    It's one rule for you and another for me, isn't it any mouse.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 9:12 AM  

  • I never claimed to have rules, you idiot. And I haven't broken them anyway. Your emotion seems to be affecting your ability to reason. Are you seeing red yet?

    But I have not insulted your autistic child. I have implied YOU are a bad mother because you do not understand autistic people. I said nothing against your son. I feel rather sorry for your son that he has such a mother as you, but I am not talking to your son, I am talking TO YOU. Understand, Einstein?

    On a less insulting note, you and Best tend to ignore and even try to discredit the expertise of autistic adults in raising autistic children. Aside from the resources on the internet whom you have worked hard to alienate there are numerous books I could direct you to. There are numerous books by autistic adults about growing up autistic and living as an autistic person - Donna Williams, Gunilla Gerland, Wendy Lawson... to name a few. I am looking at a library of them now. Books cannot hate you, but I am sure right now the people would.

    So read the books and learn where you are a "narrow minded woman who cant understand autism, autistic adults, or your own child". I am offering you growth here, not insult, but I think it is far more than you deserve or can accept.

    Because I still, and will probably continue to, believe you are evil and unchangeable. It is so easy, as you know, to turn good people bad, but I have yet to see a bad person turn good. Yes I am a cynic and sadly you and Best reinforce that cynicism.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 9:35 AM  

  • any mouse;
    "I never claimed to have rules, you idiot. And I haven't broken them anyway."

    So you haven't broken the rules you say you haven't claimed to make.
    Are you too dull to understand the idiocy in your words, Einstein?

    "But I have not insulted your autistic child. I have implied YOU are a bad mother because you do not understand autistic people."

    I never said you insulted my autistic child, but you brought up the subject of 'families', and you are now admitting you "implied" I am a bad mother.

    "On a less insulting note, you and Best tend to ignore and even try to discredit the expertise of autistic adults in raising autistic children"

    On the contrary, a good mother of an autistic child tries to see the world from their perspective, and that's why I've read the books you stupidly presume I haven't.
    I recommend Jasmine Lee O'Neill's,
    "Through the Eyes of Aliens".
    Donna Williams had an abusive mother. She went from "Nobody Nowhere", to "Somebody Somewhere" and you and you're comments here are an insult to her, saying she would hate me shows you must have little understanding or respect for Donna Williams.
    You are a disgrace to her.
    I suggest you read her books again and take more notice of words she writes on "Breaking Free from the World of Autism".

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 10:31 AM  

  • Susan Lord is trying to impress us with her book learnin. Nice to know what she knows. Now that I have eased off her she has come out of her corner flinging insults. You must be furious by now.

    Now she knows how it feels when she and John Best insult people. Of course, she will learn nothing.

    Oh, by the way, Susan. I just won :).

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 10:43 AM  

  • P.S. Susan, how could I be a disgrase to Donna Williams? I'm not related to her nor do I know her.

    Or did you mean, "You are a disgrase to your own people."? You are assuming I am autistic and you just made a biggoted slur.

    Nice to know how you really feel, you two faced troublemaker. I was right to warn people against you.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 10:50 AM  

  • any mouse;

    "Oh, by the way, Susan. I just won :)"

    Pathetic.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 10:50 AM  

  • any mouse;

    "There are numerous books by autistic adults about growing up autistic and living as an autistic person - Donna Williams, Gunilla Gerland, Wendy Lawson... to name a few. I am looking at a library of them now. Books cannot hate you, but I am sure right now the people would

    You presumed these authors and Donna Williams would hate me. Why? Because of your opinion of me, you presumed they would feel the same way.
    That's how you are a disgrace to all of them.

    "because you are an evil narrow minded woman who cant understand autism, autistic adults, or your own child."

    You spoke for all these autisic adults by saying they would hate me.
    You made a "biggoted slur".

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 11:15 AM  

  • PPS: Just to be perfectly clear I made no agreement not to bring families into this. This is a sore point with Susan Lord, apparently, probably because she is afraid of being a bad mother, or at least as far as being seen to be a bad mother.

    She mentions Donna William's phrase "Breaking free of autism". I'm not sure why. Is she suggesting that Donna Williams is no longer autistic. Is she suggesting that somehow her son can "Break Free" of his autism. It does suggest that Susan Lord cannot accept the fact that her son has autism and would like to "Cure" him. Well, I have news for her, autistic or neurotypical, gay or straight, capitalist or socialist, life will always carry problems for her son, and he will always need support at times. The same with me. The same with her. The same with everybody.

    By not accepting the fact that her son has autism and holding it up as some terrible disease she creates self hatred in her son and everything he achieved will be tainted by the idea implanted in him that he has some great disability. And suppose he never becomes "cured" of autism. Suppose her son remains the profoundly disabled person she tries to make all autistic people look like with her words. Will she love him less?

    She has spoken about autistic people having rights and then in the same post she turns around and calls them "profoundly autistic" as in "profoundly disabled". That is certainly two faced. I would call her a liar. I even question whether she has a son at all.

    That type of language Jonsmum uses is what takes rights away from whole groups of people by creating stygma and individuals then find it hard to live within the systems created by narrow minded people like Susan Lord (if indeed she exists).

    But if Jonsmum comes on an autistic blog and fasilitates and supports John Best in his abuse of others she should accept what she gets in retaliation and stop whining that people "broke her rules" or "hurt her feelings".

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 11:16 AM  

  • Susan. You are a stupid idiot who cannot read. I have always stated that I am not autistic. I say this not defensively but as a fact.

    Yes I consider myself neurodivers. I will not describe what I mean by that. You have no right to know.

    I speak for no one but myself when I insult you. I will not repeat my insults nor will I consult my thesaurus to find new ones. People know how foul (I beleave that word is new) you are.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 11:22 AM  

  • any mouse;
    Nice speech.
    Shame it's based on nothing but your opinion.
    Just because you say something, doesn't make it true.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 11:30 AM  

  • This statement is addressed to everybody. "I grow fatigued" (As Khan Noonian Sinh said.

    NEURO-DIVERS

    What a wonderful mispelling and what magnificent images it conjures up.

    By Anonymous The Neuro Diver, at 11:30 AM  

  • Susan. Ditto.

    By Anonymous Any Mouse, at 11:34 AM  

  • Mouse;
    The autistic adults and the old books you talk about have not kept pace with the state of the art involving autism. Their methods of dealing with autism became obsolete when we discovered that mercury caused the epidemic. Now we know how to help disabled children medically.
    Throw out your ancient ideas and get up to speed on the science of autism. And stop insulting decent parents who aren't content to let their kids rot in the abyss of autism like Kevin Leitch.

    By Blogger Fore Sam, at 4:58 PM  

  • Well, that Foresam guy sounds psychotic. You just can't argue with that.

    By Anonymous The Neuro Diver, at 12:56 AM  

  • Foresam said: "Their methods (meaning autistic adults) of dealing with autism became obsolete when we discovered that mercury caused the epidemic."

    As far as I see it there are two flaws in this logic.

    1. Autistic adults have been dealing with autism all their life so if we take autistic adults away when looking for solutions of dealing with the issues of autism then we really are scrambling about in the dark.

    2. We never discovered that mercury caused autism. I believe there was something called a theory that was found to be lacking. There was a theory the moon was made of cheese once. There is a difference between theory and evidence.

    So here in one sentence we have a blind spot and an outright lie. This Foresam guy is really messed up.

    By Anonymous The Neuro Diver, at 2:46 AM  

  • neuro diver;

    "There was a theory the moon was made of cheese once."
    Was this a theory or a childhood fairytale?
    You know, like the 'tooth fairy'.

    There was a theory that the world was flat.
    Science eventually prevailed and proved a lot of people wrong in this belief.
    This only goes to show that people can be wrong on differing opinions and beliefs.

    By Blogger Jonsmum, at 5:03 PM  

  • Some people believed the earth was flat, others believed it was a sphere. Turns out both groups were wrong but one group was more wrong than the other.

    The thimerosal hypothesis isn't right, it's not even wrong.

    John, you should just go ahead and copyright the phrase "rot in the abyss of autism." Google Rot, Abyss, and Autism and see how often you've used it. Time to learn some new tricks old man.

    By Blogger notmercury, at 7:00 PM  

  • "Science eventually prevailed and proved a lot of people wrong in this belief."

    Yes, reliance upon the scientific method will tend to do just that.

    Say goodbye to the mercury scapegoat.

    Say hello to your genes as the culprit.

    By Anonymous Cy Ense, at 10:53 PM  

  • I have AS and my daughter has AS.
    She means the world to me but I have been an abusive parent. It breaks my heart that she is in foster care but I tell them the truth and how I am coping when I have her because I don't want to hurt her. I love her more than anything in this world. She is the only reason that I live.

    By Blogger Jessica, at 11:21 PM  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger Jessi Lauren, at 9:12 AM  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger Jessi Lauren, at 9:38 AM  

  • I was diagnosed with mild Autism possibly High Fucntioning but because my over all IQ is High Average. So I say I have Apspergers Syndrome.

    I also have been diagnosed by a Forsencic Psychologist with PTSD and a Personalyt Disorder. The was given because I was locked away for three months under criminal law. The Hosptial Psychiatric service had also diagnosed me with Borderline Personality Disorder and mild autism and classes me as severly disabled. I have since been able to avoid contact with them because they at one stage forced me to take antipsychotic. The same when I was locked away for three months - I hate antipsychotics - They make you fat! I went from being skinny to slightly over weight because of this. I have suffered anoxeria and eating disorders in the past for me to go under the mental health act and forced treatment again - I would kill myslef if I got fat. That is why I take amphetamines.

    Since I have seen my solictor for my current charges as there is a warrant for my arrest - she said hand yourself in on Monday and I will be bail you out. She said given my circumstances the court will most likely order treatment - NO NOT AGAIN! This is why I want to die.

    It nothing to do with me not agreeing with people or being passive aggressive.

    By Anonymous jessi-lauren, at 9:04 PM  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger Jessi Lauren, at 9:24 PM  

  • People think abuse is a joke. It affects peoples lives significantly and results in many suicides. Be ignorant about child abuse! It is a fact.

    By Blogger Jessi Lauren, at 7:32 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home