Saturday, March 29, 2008
Hey Heidi - I Hear That Train A Comin'!
Oh, and Heidi .... here is another present just for you ...
The Insider Exclusive video, featuring John Tiedt, Magicsmom, and Heidi Diaz is now up and running ...
Be sure to catch the early show!
INSIDER EXCLUSIVE
Just remember .... when you see the light at the end of the tunnel ... it just might be the train ...
Oh, Can It Be ... ?
Every once in awhile, some idea presents itself to you and it simply won’t shake free. That has happened to me recently. I thank an unnamed source for providing the name of the phenomena I’m describing.
It has been a rather interesting last week or so among the various anti-Kimkins boards and blogs, to say the least; some of it seemingly unrelated, but all held together with the common thread of Heidi Diaz - if only because that is the reason that we have all congregated into these communal areas. As I watched various things unfold I was struck by the intensity of emotions, and the dogged determination of one group of people to control another.
Am I referring to Heidi Diaz herself? Am I referring to Low Carb Friends and those who venture into the Fascination with Kimmer threads? Am I referring to the manipulation that takes place in some types of damaging relationships? Am I referring to the latest hoopla that has consumed so much bandwidth within the comments area of several blogs? Maybe I’m referring to one – perhaps to all. You decide.
Gaslight (Trailer)
Gaslighting
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Gaslighting is a form of psychological abuse. It uses persistent denials of fact which, as they build up over time, make the victim progressively anxious, confused, and less able to trust his or her own memory and perception.
The term was coined from the 1940 film Gaslight and its 1944 remake in which changes in gas light levels are experienced several times by the main character. The classic example in the film is the character Gregory using the gas lamps in the attic, causing the rest of the lamps in the house to dim slightly; when Paula comments on the lights' dimming, she is told she is imagining things. Paula believes herself alone in the house when the dimming occurs, unaware that Gregory has entered the attic from the house next door, and is searching for jewels he believes to be hidden there. The sinister interpretation of the change in light levels is part of a larger pattern of deception to which the character Paula is subjected.
This technique is also supposed to have been used by the Manson Family during their "creepy crawler" burglaries during which nothing was stolen, but furniture in the house was rearranged.
……………….
In 2006, a case of internet gaslighting cost 13 year old Megan Meier her life, after she was befriended by 16 year old Josh Evans, who abruptly turned on her. It turns out that Josh was created in the mind of 47 year old Lori Drew, a neighbor of the Meier family who had decided she needed to teach Megan a lesson, apparently for deciding not to remain friends with her daughter. After several weeks of friendship and innocent flirting, Josh suddenly turned on Megan, beginning with telling her he didn’t like how she treated her friends. He flung insults at her, belittled her. Others soon joined into the fray, hurling insults at Megan. Josh finally told her that the world would be a better place without her. Megan was devastated by this turn of events which she couldn’t begin to comprehend. She closed herself in her closet and proceeded to hang herself. All because some other person – an adult, no less – justified in her own mind that it was acceptable to “mess with her”.
One of our deepest emotional needs is that of acceptance. While I believe we can never find complete fulfillment of that need outside of our relationship with God, it is normal – no, necessary, to find some level of achievement filling that need in our human relationships. It is in the quest to meet that very need that we become vulnerable to the dangerous phenomenon of gaslighting.
Do we fling around terms like crazy, self-serving, distorted, in need of professional help, trouble maker, deceptive … the list goes on … without pausing to comprehend the level of responsibility we truly do have towards our fellow human beings? Do we mount purposeful, orchestrated attacks on other individuals, in the hopes of silencing them by berating them and humiliating them so soundly – by refusing to provide them proof of our claims and simply demanding that they accept we are right - that they begin to wonder if we know their minds better than they do themselves?
Could our behavior towards others be considered gaslighting?
It has been a rather interesting last week or so among the various anti-Kimkins boards and blogs, to say the least; some of it seemingly unrelated, but all held together with the common thread of Heidi Diaz - if only because that is the reason that we have all congregated into these communal areas. As I watched various things unfold I was struck by the intensity of emotions, and the dogged determination of one group of people to control another.
Am I referring to Heidi Diaz herself? Am I referring to Low Carb Friends and those who venture into the Fascination with Kimmer threads? Am I referring to the manipulation that takes place in some types of damaging relationships? Am I referring to the latest hoopla that has consumed so much bandwidth within the comments area of several blogs? Maybe I’m referring to one – perhaps to all. You decide.
Gaslight (Trailer)
Gaslighting
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Gaslighting is a form of psychological abuse. It uses persistent denials of fact which, as they build up over time, make the victim progressively anxious, confused, and less able to trust his or her own memory and perception.
The term was coined from the 1940 film Gaslight and its 1944 remake in which changes in gas light levels are experienced several times by the main character. The classic example in the film is the character Gregory using the gas lamps in the attic, causing the rest of the lamps in the house to dim slightly; when Paula comments on the lights' dimming, she is told she is imagining things. Paula believes herself alone in the house when the dimming occurs, unaware that Gregory has entered the attic from the house next door, and is searching for jewels he believes to be hidden there. The sinister interpretation of the change in light levels is part of a larger pattern of deception to which the character Paula is subjected.
This technique is also supposed to have been used by the Manson Family during their "creepy crawler" burglaries during which nothing was stolen, but furniture in the house was rearranged.
……………….
In 2006, a case of internet gaslighting cost 13 year old Megan Meier her life, after she was befriended by 16 year old Josh Evans, who abruptly turned on her. It turns out that Josh was created in the mind of 47 year old Lori Drew, a neighbor of the Meier family who had decided she needed to teach Megan a lesson, apparently for deciding not to remain friends with her daughter. After several weeks of friendship and innocent flirting, Josh suddenly turned on Megan, beginning with telling her he didn’t like how she treated her friends. He flung insults at her, belittled her. Others soon joined into the fray, hurling insults at Megan. Josh finally told her that the world would be a better place without her. Megan was devastated by this turn of events which she couldn’t begin to comprehend. She closed herself in her closet and proceeded to hang herself. All because some other person – an adult, no less – justified in her own mind that it was acceptable to “mess with her”.
One of our deepest emotional needs is that of acceptance. While I believe we can never find complete fulfillment of that need outside of our relationship with God, it is normal – no, necessary, to find some level of achievement filling that need in our human relationships. It is in the quest to meet that very need that we become vulnerable to the dangerous phenomenon of gaslighting.
Do we fling around terms like crazy, self-serving, distorted, in need of professional help, trouble maker, deceptive … the list goes on … without pausing to comprehend the level of responsibility we truly do have towards our fellow human beings? Do we mount purposeful, orchestrated attacks on other individuals, in the hopes of silencing them by berating them and humiliating them so soundly – by refusing to provide them proof of our claims and simply demanding that they accept we are right - that they begin to wonder if we know their minds better than they do themselves?
Could our behavior towards others be considered gaslighting?
Friday, March 21, 2008
Great Kimkins Lawsuit Update!
Great news! This was just posted on LCF by WildAngel6 (sorry to cross post, but this is so important, I didn't think you'd mind):
"Good News from John!
I just got an email from him saying that we got to keep the Writ of Attachment. He'll have a status letter update for us soon.
Thank you EVERYONE for your prayers, good thoughts and crossed fingers!"
YES!
Happy Easter, Heidi ....
"Good News from John!
I just got an email from him saying that we got to keep the Writ of Attachment. He'll have a status letter update for us soon.
Thank you EVERYONE for your prayers, good thoughts and crossed fingers!"
YES!
Happy Easter, Heidi ....
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Sociopath or Psychopath?
As I plunge deeper in my attempts to understand the personality that drives people like Heidi Diaz, aka Kimmer, as well as those who hold to her side steadfastly, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that she is not the least bit worthy of that trust and devotion, I find myself engaged in a fascinating study into the human psyche.
First, the disclaimer: I am not labeling Heidi Diaz, nor any other person, as suffering from any particular personality disorder. That type of diagnosis is only possible after examination by a qualified professional, of which I am not. I do find some of these descriptions eerily reflective of the behaviors that Heidi exhibits. I share these observations simply for the stated purpose of stimulating conversation. In that vein, I continue.
The more currently used diagnostic term for a person exhibiting sociopathic behavior is Antisocial Personality Disorder. It started out in the 1800’s being referred to as “moral insanity”. I like that term, personally. It speaks more to the heart of the issue – a lack of moral constraint. In the 2000’s though, it seems to have become politically incorrect to speak about morality. Morality carries with it an underlying meaning of some greater authority – some defined right and wrong. Many people in this day and age prefer to think that morality – right and wrong – are subjective, defined and driven by the winds of change of the culture. I will openly state that I am not one of the many. I do believe in an absolute moral authority – found in the person of God, spelled out clearly in the Holy Scriptures. I add that only so my bias is clear from the beginning.
In the course of my research, I’ve come across a concise expression of why we fall for the lies of the person with APD, and why we stay commited to those lies. This is part of a much larger article, entitled THE PSYCHOPATH - The Mask of Sanity, found at http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath.htm. I’ll be referencing this as well as other resources as I work through this whole line of thinking. Here is the rather lengthy quote:
What kind of psychological weaknesses drive people to prefer lies over truth?
This may have something to do with what is called Cognitive Dissonance. Leon Festinger developed the theory of Cognitive Dissonance in the 50's when he apparently stumbled onto a UFO cult in the Midwest. They were prophesying a coming world cataclysm and "alien rapture." When no one was raptured and no cataclysm he studied the believers’ response, and detailed it in his book "When Prophecy Fails." Festinger observed:
A man with a conviction is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point.
We have all experienced the futility of trying to change a strong conviction, especially if the convinced person has some investment in his belief. We are familiar with the variety of ingenious defenses with which people protect their convictions, managing to keep them unscathed through the most devastating attacks.
But man's resourcefulness goes beyond simply protecting a belief. Suppose an individual believes something with his whole heart; suppose further that he has a commitment to this belief, that he has taken irrevocable actions because of it; finally, suppose that he is presented with evidence, unequivocal and undeniable evidence, that his belief is wrong: what will happen? The individual will frequently emerge, not only unshaken, but even more convinced of the truth of his beliefs than ever before. Indeed, he may even show a new fervor about convincing and converting other people to his view.
It seems that part of the problem has to do with ego and the need to be "right." People with a high "need to be right" or "perfect" seem to be unable to acknowledge that they have been conned. "There is no crime in the cynical American calendar more humiliating than to be a sucker." People will go along with and support a psychopath, in the face of evidence that they have and ARE being conned, because their own ego structure depends on being right, and to admit an error of judgment would destroy their carefully constructed image of themselves.
Even more amazing is the fact that when psychopaths do get exposed by someone who is not afraid to admit that they have been conned, the psychopath is a master at painting their victims as the "real culprits." Hare cites a case of the third wife of a forty year old high school teacher:
For five years he cheated on me, kept me living in fear, and forged checks on my personal bank account. But everyone, including my doctor and lawyer and my friends, blamed me for the problem. He had them so convinced that he was a great guy and that I was going mad, I began to believe it myself. Even when he cleaned out my bank account and ran off with a seventeen-year-old student, a lot of people couldn't believe it, and some wanted to know what I had done to make him act so strangely!
Psychopaths just have what it takes to defraud and bilk others: they can be fast talkers, they can be charming, they can be self-assured and at ease in social situations; they are cool under pressure, unfazed by the possibility of being found out, and totally ruthless. And even when they are exposed, they can carry on as if nothing has happened, often making their accusers the targets of accusations of being victimized by THEM.
I was once dumbfounded by the logic of an inmate who described his murder victim as having benefited from the crime by learning "a hard lesson about life." [Hare]
The victims keep asking: "How could I have been so stupid? How could I have fallen for that incredible line of baloney?" And, of course, if they don't ask it of themselves, you can be sure that their friends and associates will ask "How on earth could you have been taken in to that extent?"
The usual answer: "You had to be there" simply does not convey the whole thing. Hare writes:
What makes psychopaths different from all others is the remarkable ease with which they lie, the pervasiveness of their deception, and the callousness with which they carry it out.
But there is something else about the speech of psychopaths that is equally puzzling: their frequent use of contradictory and logically inconsistent statements that usually escape detection. Recent research on the language of psychopaths provides us with some important clues to this puzzle, as well as to the uncanny ability psychopaths have to move words - and people- around so easily. […]
Here are some examples:
When asked if he had ever committed a violent offense, a man serving time for theft answered, "No, but I once had to kill someone."
A woman with a staggering record of fraud, deceit, lies, and broken promises concluded a letter to the parole board with, "I've let a lot of people down… One is only as good as her reputation and name. My word is as good as gold."
A man serving a term for armed robbery replied to the testimony of an eyewitness, "He's lying. I wasn't there. I should have blown his ******* head off."
……………..
I think most of us can attest to falling victim to at least one person of this type. It is unnerving to realize how susceptible we really are to those without any sort of moral grounding. We can take solace, however, in the professional opinions that tell us that we actually are not equipped to protect ourselves entirely from being conned by such individuals in the first place. Well, we are comforted and alarmed at the same time. But at least it should relieve us of that overwhelming feeling of having somehow failed ourselves. Rather we need to acknowledge that having no consciousness of guilt can give one the upper hand when dealing with people with a healthy sense of trust in their fellow man.
Hopefully we don’t become so invested in what they are saying that we can’t emotionally risk pulling away.
First, the disclaimer: I am not labeling Heidi Diaz, nor any other person, as suffering from any particular personality disorder. That type of diagnosis is only possible after examination by a qualified professional, of which I am not. I do find some of these descriptions eerily reflective of the behaviors that Heidi exhibits. I share these observations simply for the stated purpose of stimulating conversation. In that vein, I continue.
The more currently used diagnostic term for a person exhibiting sociopathic behavior is Antisocial Personality Disorder. It started out in the 1800’s being referred to as “moral insanity”. I like that term, personally. It speaks more to the heart of the issue – a lack of moral constraint. In the 2000’s though, it seems to have become politically incorrect to speak about morality. Morality carries with it an underlying meaning of some greater authority – some defined right and wrong. Many people in this day and age prefer to think that morality – right and wrong – are subjective, defined and driven by the winds of change of the culture. I will openly state that I am not one of the many. I do believe in an absolute moral authority – found in the person of God, spelled out clearly in the Holy Scriptures. I add that only so my bias is clear from the beginning.
In the course of my research, I’ve come across a concise expression of why we fall for the lies of the person with APD, and why we stay commited to those lies. This is part of a much larger article, entitled THE PSYCHOPATH - The Mask of Sanity, found at http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath.htm. I’ll be referencing this as well as other resources as I work through this whole line of thinking. Here is the rather lengthy quote:
What kind of psychological weaknesses drive people to prefer lies over truth?
This may have something to do with what is called Cognitive Dissonance. Leon Festinger developed the theory of Cognitive Dissonance in the 50's when he apparently stumbled onto a UFO cult in the Midwest. They were prophesying a coming world cataclysm and "alien rapture." When no one was raptured and no cataclysm he studied the believers’ response, and detailed it in his book "When Prophecy Fails." Festinger observed:
A man with a conviction is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point.
We have all experienced the futility of trying to change a strong conviction, especially if the convinced person has some investment in his belief. We are familiar with the variety of ingenious defenses with which people protect their convictions, managing to keep them unscathed through the most devastating attacks.
But man's resourcefulness goes beyond simply protecting a belief. Suppose an individual believes something with his whole heart; suppose further that he has a commitment to this belief, that he has taken irrevocable actions because of it; finally, suppose that he is presented with evidence, unequivocal and undeniable evidence, that his belief is wrong: what will happen? The individual will frequently emerge, not only unshaken, but even more convinced of the truth of his beliefs than ever before. Indeed, he may even show a new fervor about convincing and converting other people to his view.
It seems that part of the problem has to do with ego and the need to be "right." People with a high "need to be right" or "perfect" seem to be unable to acknowledge that they have been conned. "There is no crime in the cynical American calendar more humiliating than to be a sucker." People will go along with and support a psychopath, in the face of evidence that they have and ARE being conned, because their own ego structure depends on being right, and to admit an error of judgment would destroy their carefully constructed image of themselves.
Even more amazing is the fact that when psychopaths do get exposed by someone who is not afraid to admit that they have been conned, the psychopath is a master at painting their victims as the "real culprits." Hare cites a case of the third wife of a forty year old high school teacher:
For five years he cheated on me, kept me living in fear, and forged checks on my personal bank account. But everyone, including my doctor and lawyer and my friends, blamed me for the problem. He had them so convinced that he was a great guy and that I was going mad, I began to believe it myself. Even when he cleaned out my bank account and ran off with a seventeen-year-old student, a lot of people couldn't believe it, and some wanted to know what I had done to make him act so strangely!
Psychopaths just have what it takes to defraud and bilk others: they can be fast talkers, they can be charming, they can be self-assured and at ease in social situations; they are cool under pressure, unfazed by the possibility of being found out, and totally ruthless. And even when they are exposed, they can carry on as if nothing has happened, often making their accusers the targets of accusations of being victimized by THEM.
I was once dumbfounded by the logic of an inmate who described his murder victim as having benefited from the crime by learning "a hard lesson about life." [Hare]
The victims keep asking: "How could I have been so stupid? How could I have fallen for that incredible line of baloney?" And, of course, if they don't ask it of themselves, you can be sure that their friends and associates will ask "How on earth could you have been taken in to that extent?"
The usual answer: "You had to be there" simply does not convey the whole thing. Hare writes:
What makes psychopaths different from all others is the remarkable ease with which they lie, the pervasiveness of their deception, and the callousness with which they carry it out.
But there is something else about the speech of psychopaths that is equally puzzling: their frequent use of contradictory and logically inconsistent statements that usually escape detection. Recent research on the language of psychopaths provides us with some important clues to this puzzle, as well as to the uncanny ability psychopaths have to move words - and people- around so easily. […]
Here are some examples:
When asked if he had ever committed a violent offense, a man serving time for theft answered, "No, but I once had to kill someone."
A woman with a staggering record of fraud, deceit, lies, and broken promises concluded a letter to the parole board with, "I've let a lot of people down… One is only as good as her reputation and name. My word is as good as gold."
A man serving a term for armed robbery replied to the testimony of an eyewitness, "He's lying. I wasn't there. I should have blown his ******* head off."
……………..
I think most of us can attest to falling victim to at least one person of this type. It is unnerving to realize how susceptible we really are to those without any sort of moral grounding. We can take solace, however, in the professional opinions that tell us that we actually are not equipped to protect ourselves entirely from being conned by such individuals in the first place. Well, we are comforted and alarmed at the same time. But at least it should relieve us of that overwhelming feeling of having somehow failed ourselves. Rather we need to acknowledge that having no consciousness of guilt can give one the upper hand when dealing with people with a healthy sense of trust in their fellow man.
Hopefully we don’t become so invested in what they are saying that we can’t emotionally risk pulling away.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
The Latest on the Kimkins Scandal
You will want to read the update provided by John Tiedt regarding the Kimkins Lawsuit. Will Heidi's devout followers find a way to look past these latest revelations? Will they be willing to turn a blind eye to her very own words and confessions?
Heidi, I predict that you will spend next Christmas as a guest of the California penal system.
To read John Tiedt's latest update, head on over to Jeanessa's blog.
Heidi, I predict that you will spend next Christmas as a guest of the California penal system.
To read John Tiedt's latest update, head on over to Jeanessa's blog.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Need A Laugh?
Oh, they say that laughter is the best medicine! Things have been way too serious around here for far too long. So, enjoy!
The Fine Print: Using the restroom first is highly recommended. Also, I will not be held responsible for computer keyboards due to exposure to liquids.
The Fine Print: Using the restroom first is highly recommended. Also, I will not be held responsible for computer keyboards due to exposure to liquids.
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Oh, John ... You Foolish Man
You have no idea what you just set in motion. No idea. I hope you are ready to live with the fallout of your careless mistake.
Well, good luck to you, old buddy. This is out of my hands now.
Well, good luck to you, old buddy. This is out of my hands now.
Friday, March 7, 2008
What Happened To Honor Anyway?
**
Maybe I’m just getting old. Growing up there was a great emphasis in our home put on truthfulness and trustworthiness. My Dad used to always tell us that so long as we lived with integrity, they can take everything away from you, but you will still have your honor. That just doesn't seem to matter to more and more people these days. Do YOU sleep better at night knowing that one who is sworn (and paid, I might add) to keep us safe doesn’t think twice about lying when it serves his purpose? When those who are supposed to protect us lose that foundational base, what do we have left?
Kat said:
I think John's approach just hurts the memory of our brave men fighting for us. Past and present. He could have gone about it in a different way but obviously, the seems to be a mental issue on his part too. Sad, just sad. And to be fighting with the enemy...what does that tell ya?
Heidi, try as you might...there is nothing you can find or do to stop the lawsuit so I guess as usual...you'll have to make up lies to CYA.
March 4, 2008 10:45 AM
I disagreed with Kat at the time she wrote those words, and said so publicly. So now, publicly, I would like to apologize to you, Kat. I believe you are right.
This whole ordeal surrounding John Essex has been confusing and at times emotionally draining. He is indeed John Essex, ex-husband of Trista Essex. I managed to get that part right. I can tell you, though, that as with everything else mixed up with the Kimkins scan, all is not as it seems.
In the past few days I have had the opportunity to review many of the statements made to me by this person. Several of those statements simply don’t stand up under scrutiny. Some facts have been blatantly embellished, and some have been completely fabricated. I have learned a lot more than I ever intended or desired to learn about him. I am absolutely amazed at the lengths some people will go to cast themselves in a favorable light.
Some of those facts involve the conditions of military service. Yes, John Essex served in the American Armed Forces, having enlisted around the age of 18. Lots of other claims he made in regards to that service have come into question. Many of those questions will be brought to light in the coming hours and days. When someone misrepresents their service to our country, it has the potential to cast a long shadow over all men and women who proudly wear the uniform.
For now, though, I want to apologize to Kat. Sometimes, in my desire to see the best in people, I slip on my rose colored glasses, drink a cup of gullibility, and forge ahead. The end result of that is usually that I come across looking foolish and feeling sheepish. As I do this time.
Maybe I’m just getting old. Growing up there was a great emphasis in our home put on truthfulness and trustworthiness. My Dad used to always tell us that so long as we lived with integrity, they can take everything away from you, but you will still have your honor. That just doesn't seem to matter to more and more people these days. Do YOU sleep better at night knowing that one who is sworn (and paid, I might add) to keep us safe doesn’t think twice about lying when it serves his purpose? When those who are supposed to protect us lose that foundational base, what do we have left?
Kat said:
I think John's approach just hurts the memory of our brave men fighting for us. Past and present. He could have gone about it in a different way but obviously, the seems to be a mental issue on his part too. Sad, just sad. And to be fighting with the enemy...what does that tell ya?
Heidi, try as you might...there is nothing you can find or do to stop the lawsuit so I guess as usual...you'll have to make up lies to CYA.
March 4, 2008 10:45 AM
I disagreed with Kat at the time she wrote those words, and said so publicly. So now, publicly, I would like to apologize to you, Kat. I believe you are right.
This whole ordeal surrounding John Essex has been confusing and at times emotionally draining. He is indeed John Essex, ex-husband of Trista Essex. I managed to get that part right. I can tell you, though, that as with everything else mixed up with the Kimkins scan, all is not as it seems.
In the past few days I have had the opportunity to review many of the statements made to me by this person. Several of those statements simply don’t stand up under scrutiny. Some facts have been blatantly embellished, and some have been completely fabricated. I have learned a lot more than I ever intended or desired to learn about him. I am absolutely amazed at the lengths some people will go to cast themselves in a favorable light.
Some of those facts involve the conditions of military service. Yes, John Essex served in the American Armed Forces, having enlisted around the age of 18. Lots of other claims he made in regards to that service have come into question. Many of those questions will be brought to light in the coming hours and days. When someone misrepresents their service to our country, it has the potential to cast a long shadow over all men and women who proudly wear the uniform.
For now, though, I want to apologize to Kat. Sometimes, in my desire to see the best in people, I slip on my rose colored glasses, drink a cup of gullibility, and forge ahead. The end result of that is usually that I come across looking foolish and feeling sheepish. As I do this time.
Monday, March 3, 2008
Hello, Martina's Martini. We Meet Again.
“When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
These are the opening lines of the Declaration of Independence, signed by 57 brave men, on July 4, 1776, setting into motion a chain of events that led to the formation of the greatest county this world has ever known (sorry to my non-American friends, but I do have a bias here!). Our forefathers believed that our rights – specifically those of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, were worth dying for. Many men did just that.
Many men and women continue to this day to risk their lives for the cause of freedom around the world. I value their sacrifice. I appreciate their sacrifice. I honor their memories.
It is after considerable contemplation, and because of the level of respect that I have for the office of soldier that I have decided to post this comment which the person known to most of us as Martina’s Martini sent to me last night. Those of you reading may not understand the connection that I make with the great ideals of our beginnings with these matters. I believe that it is in the distortion of those rights, and the belittling of the sacrifices that brave men and women have made, that the likes of Heidi Diaz are born. Hopefully, as you read further, you will understand my point.
From early on, MM, I gave you the benefit of the doubt. I accepted your presentation of who you are. I accepted your stated purpose and motives. I do feel that you betrayed that trust, but I will let others judge for themselves. The case of Heidi Diaz is one with its foundation steeped in fraud and deception. I have never wavered in my belief that you are NOT Heidi Diaz – that you are who you told me you are, in spite of the fact that it would 100% consistent with the past actions of Heidi to fabricate a person such as Martina’s Martini. In truth, many of the behaviors that you, as MM, presented are 100% consistent with the past behaviors of Heidi herself. Apparently that acceptance that another person extended to you was meaningless, if your actions are to be used as the measuring stick.
I post this so that you, my blog visitors, may hear him in his own words.
I know that there are many questions that others have – questions like, why, if what you say here was your true intention, did you explode onto the scene in the Fascination With Kimmer thread in such an abrupt and condescending manner? Were you mocking the Ducks you claim to admire when you posted cryptic messages on your Martina’s Martini blog? Why the mind games? If you choose to answer those questions, feel free to address them, or to invite others to ask whatever questions they have right here in this blog. I’ll post the questions and all comments, including yours.
But for me, there is only one question that I have that I would appreciate you answering. Why, if what you say here is indeed true, did you correspond with Heidi Diaz, giving to her information that pertained to one of the principals in this lawsuit? Please do not bother to deny that you did that. It has been proven to my complete satisfaction that you did, in fact, do so. That is the one part of this that I am having the most difficulty with - reconciling that action with the person you presented yourself to be. When people do what you have done to another person, that person's ability to trust and willingness to reach out to other hurting human beings becomes diminished. I'd like to believe that you are the type of person for whom that matters.
Remember that we talked about your legacy, and writing your story? Well, here is your opportunity to clean up some of what you either intentionally or inadvertantly left for those behind you to find.
I assure, you, MM, that I certainly WILL continue to fight. I will do what I can to reach out to victims of the deception of Heidi Diaz. I will continue to fight with the resources available to me to see to it that justice is served in this case. And I am not alone in that quest – not by a long shot. There is a day of reckoning coming to Heidi Diaz. Count on it. It remains to be seen who will be found culpable alongside her.
Here follows the comment that Martina’s Martini posted to my blog last night in response to the entry, Was I Duped?
“Actually, eh, it had nothing to do with any of this. See in this situation, you always need to know what someones motives are. Mine was never money, far from or helping Heidi. It wasn't for attention. Systems have certain drawbacks. Even when people try to flock and gather information from ever corner of reason. Psychology is and always will be the study of human behaviors. See. I had something that needed to be discussed with someone in this world. Messages flew. See Pru, I found resolution in all of this. The other person also found a resolution in the ongoing situation. When you think or feel you have been duped, it kinda makes me feel bad, but at the same time. You continue to drive on...and make this matter a human fight. See, quite honestly, if it wasn't for "The Ducks, and this issue not discussed on the internet, then I would have never never really known what the world had been happening with this person. See..YOU may hate me, and in some small matter rightly so. The actions though, prooved to me that they are good people in this world. My dealings with this person, completely are now at a total end. She has found a resolution, and so have I. You have no clue to what end though I had wanted things to be over. This whole Kimkins mess did have impact on this person. I knew what these people were looking for months ago when the calls did start happening. They wanted an edge, they didnt get an edge. What they got was something THEY THOUGHT they were going to be able to use. I am a broken down old soldier, my face is half gone, my foot isnt there anymore. Now to conclude. They would never..never be a day in this world history, I would ever say anything bad about the other person. Although, we had a bad past, The recent events, changed that. Pru, she found a resolution....and so did I. The system of gathering information though, has flaws, has drawbacks for you guys. They are con people, and bad people, and weirdos out there. They are people wanting 15 to 30 minutes of fame. I didn't want any of that. I came across this whole mess by accident. You take care Pru, be well and do keep up the good fight.”
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
These are the opening lines of the Declaration of Independence, signed by 57 brave men, on July 4, 1776, setting into motion a chain of events that led to the formation of the greatest county this world has ever known (sorry to my non-American friends, but I do have a bias here!). Our forefathers believed that our rights – specifically those of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, were worth dying for. Many men did just that.
Many men and women continue to this day to risk their lives for the cause of freedom around the world. I value their sacrifice. I appreciate their sacrifice. I honor their memories.
It is after considerable contemplation, and because of the level of respect that I have for the office of soldier that I have decided to post this comment which the person known to most of us as Martina’s Martini sent to me last night. Those of you reading may not understand the connection that I make with the great ideals of our beginnings with these matters. I believe that it is in the distortion of those rights, and the belittling of the sacrifices that brave men and women have made, that the likes of Heidi Diaz are born. Hopefully, as you read further, you will understand my point.
From early on, MM, I gave you the benefit of the doubt. I accepted your presentation of who you are. I accepted your stated purpose and motives. I do feel that you betrayed that trust, but I will let others judge for themselves. The case of Heidi Diaz is one with its foundation steeped in fraud and deception. I have never wavered in my belief that you are NOT Heidi Diaz – that you are who you told me you are, in spite of the fact that it would 100% consistent with the past actions of Heidi to fabricate a person such as Martina’s Martini. In truth, many of the behaviors that you, as MM, presented are 100% consistent with the past behaviors of Heidi herself. Apparently that acceptance that another person extended to you was meaningless, if your actions are to be used as the measuring stick.
I post this so that you, my blog visitors, may hear him in his own words.
I know that there are many questions that others have – questions like, why, if what you say here was your true intention, did you explode onto the scene in the Fascination With Kimmer thread in such an abrupt and condescending manner? Were you mocking the Ducks you claim to admire when you posted cryptic messages on your Martina’s Martini blog? Why the mind games? If you choose to answer those questions, feel free to address them, or to invite others to ask whatever questions they have right here in this blog. I’ll post the questions and all comments, including yours.
But for me, there is only one question that I have that I would appreciate you answering. Why, if what you say here is indeed true, did you correspond with Heidi Diaz, giving to her information that pertained to one of the principals in this lawsuit? Please do not bother to deny that you did that. It has been proven to my complete satisfaction that you did, in fact, do so. That is the one part of this that I am having the most difficulty with - reconciling that action with the person you presented yourself to be. When people do what you have done to another person, that person's ability to trust and willingness to reach out to other hurting human beings becomes diminished. I'd like to believe that you are the type of person for whom that matters.
Remember that we talked about your legacy, and writing your story? Well, here is your opportunity to clean up some of what you either intentionally or inadvertantly left for those behind you to find.
I assure, you, MM, that I certainly WILL continue to fight. I will do what I can to reach out to victims of the deception of Heidi Diaz. I will continue to fight with the resources available to me to see to it that justice is served in this case. And I am not alone in that quest – not by a long shot. There is a day of reckoning coming to Heidi Diaz. Count on it. It remains to be seen who will be found culpable alongside her.
Here follows the comment that Martina’s Martini posted to my blog last night in response to the entry, Was I Duped?
“Actually, eh, it had nothing to do with any of this. See in this situation, you always need to know what someones motives are. Mine was never money, far from or helping Heidi. It wasn't for attention. Systems have certain drawbacks. Even when people try to flock and gather information from ever corner of reason. Psychology is and always will be the study of human behaviors. See. I had something that needed to be discussed with someone in this world. Messages flew. See Pru, I found resolution in all of this. The other person also found a resolution in the ongoing situation. When you think or feel you have been duped, it kinda makes me feel bad, but at the same time. You continue to drive on...and make this matter a human fight. See, quite honestly, if it wasn't for "The Ducks, and this issue not discussed on the internet, then I would have never never really known what the world had been happening with this person. See..YOU may hate me, and in some small matter rightly so. The actions though, prooved to me that they are good people in this world. My dealings with this person, completely are now at a total end. She has found a resolution, and so have I. You have no clue to what end though I had wanted things to be over. This whole Kimkins mess did have impact on this person. I knew what these people were looking for months ago when the calls did start happening. They wanted an edge, they didnt get an edge. What they got was something THEY THOUGHT they were going to be able to use. I am a broken down old soldier, my face is half gone, my foot isnt there anymore. Now to conclude. They would never..never be a day in this world history, I would ever say anything bad about the other person. Although, we had a bad past, The recent events, changed that. Pru, she found a resolution....and so did I. The system of gathering information though, has flaws, has drawbacks for you guys. They are con people, and bad people, and weirdos out there. They are people wanting 15 to 30 minutes of fame. I didn't want any of that. I came across this whole mess by accident. You take care Pru, be well and do keep up the good fight.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
