Russ Boyd $50K HORSE entrant

[MicroBob]

jman - I really really want to post another 10-paragraph insult at you because it's really fun (and you know I don't mean whatever it is I'm saying because I don't even know what I'm saying).

But it unfortunately clogs up the forums too much so I'm going to refrain.

Those things are freaking awesome though!!

[TimWillTell]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for the condescending link.

[/ QUOTE ] That wasn't condescending, based on your "Anyone who has taken Business 101 knows that a company's owners aren't liable" comment, it was clear that you did not know about this principle, I merely decided to educate you. Condescending would be, for example, making dozens of posts correcting other people's grammar (including non-native english speakers), and insulting them for said grammar.


[ QUOTE ]
But I'm not asking your distinguished opinion about whether a corporate veil can be pierced due to fraud or other reasons. I'm asking you to support your assertion that "indeed, based on the facts of this case, it sounds like he would be liable, at least under U.S. law". I do apologize for asking you to take the time to back up your statement.


[/ QUOTE ]

I never asserted that Boyd definitely could be sued, merely that it was possible for him to be sued. As I am obviously not familiar with all the facts (and neither are you), I cannot give a definitive answer. I was merely replying to your assinine "Business 101" comment, in which you made an absolute statement as to the liability of business-owners, a statement that was incorrect.

[ QUOTE ]
Good assumption, since it appears to be uncontradicted. So now let's talk about "appearing to commit fraud." Hint: that's not the same as screwing up and going bankrupt.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, committing fraud would be something along the lines of lying to your customers regarding the security of the money they keep with you. Pretty much all the reports I've read include Boyd lying right up to the very end to his customers, in an effort to prevent them from cashing out. Thats what we call fraud.


Keep in mind, once again, that all I ever asserted was that your statement that Dutch Boyd couldn't be sued because owners of businesses can't be sued for business debts was retarded. I stand by that. Now why don't you scamper off and correct someone else's grammar.

[/ QUOTE ]

Finally, jman gives up the fight without a fight. He continues to rant against a statement that nobody made, and he still puts quotes around it as if somebody had said it.

But he also correctly points out that he's not familiar with the facts (and that I'm not either). Finally - a completely clear concession. I wasn't claiming that Boyd shot JFK, so I don't need to prove it. But jman was claiming fraudulent behavior and other unnamed criminal liabilities - but he has backed off. An apology would have been nice, but you can't have everything.

None of us likes Russ Boyd, but what he did was bad enough without making up more stuff. Next time you find yourself in a position like this, why not just state your opinion and refrain from manufacturing new facts? People will respect your position more that way.

[/ QUOTE ]

My original goal for this letter was to scrutinize Frommagio's remarks point by dim-witted point. Unfortunately, Frommagio's focus wanders so wildly that he never actually finishes any of his points. I think you will notice this in the ensuing discussion. In the first place, we've all heard Frommagio yammer and whine about how he's being scapegoated again, the poor dear.

According to the latest scientific evidence, Frommagio has frequently been spotted making nicey-nice with insufferable poltroons. Is this because he needs their help to judge people by the color of their skin while ignoring the content of their character? The answer should be self-evident, so let me just point out that no one likes being attacked by hooliganism-oriented, loud moochers. Even worse, Frommagio exploits our fear of those attacks -- which he claims will evolve before you know it into biological, chemical, or nuclear attacks -- as a pretext to attack my character. If you think that's scary, then you should remember that if I am correctly informed, by seeking to evoke a misdirected response to genuine unresolved grievances, Frommagio is playing Russian roulette with our future. In any case, if the only way to change the minds of those who extinguish the voices of opposition is for me to cry, then so be it. It would obviously be worth it because I believe in "live and let live". Frommagio, in contrast, demands not only tolerance and acceptance of his equivocations but endorsement of them. It's because of such gruesome demands that I aver that I am now in a position to define what I mean when I say that he is battening on us. What I mean is that Frommagio has, at times, called me "humorless" or "lewd". Such contemptuous name-calling has passed far beyond the stage of being infantile but harmless. It has the capacity to have more impact on Earth's biological, geological, and chemical systems during our lifetime and our children's than all preceding human generations had together. Frommagio truly believes that the laws of nature don't apply to him. I hope you realize that that's just an uppity pipe dream from a puerile pipe, and that in the real world, Frommagio's propositions are merely a stalking horse. They mask his secret intention to engage in an endless round of finger pointing. He wants us to feel sorry for the grotesque, insane fussbudgets who prevent people from thinking and visualizing beyond an increasingly psychologically caged existence. I assert we should instead feel sorry for their victims, all of whom know full well that Frommagio decries or dismisses capitalism, technology, industrialization, and systems of government borne of Enlightenment ideas about the dignity and freedom of human beings. These are the things that he fears, because they are wedded to individual initiative and responsibility. Last summer, I attempted what I knew would be a hopeless task. I tried to convince Frommagio that he is hardly the first proponent of pugnacious, stroppy antiheroism and he is unlikely to be the last. As I expected, Frommagio was unconvinced. He is an interesting character. On the one hand, Frommagio likes to take rights away from individuals on the basis of prejudice, myth, irrational belief, inaccurate information, and outright falsehood. But on the other hand, he may unwittingly wiretap all of our telephones and computers. I say "unwittingly" because he is apparently unaware that he operates under the influence of a particular ideology: a set of beliefs based on the root metaphor of the transmission of forces. Until you understand this root metaphor you won't be able to grasp why once you understand Frommagio's sermons, you have a responsibility to do something about them. To know, to understand, and not to act, is an egregious sin of omission. It is the sin of silence. It is the sin of letting Frommagio violate values so important to our sense of community.

Whether or not Frommagio should create widespread hysteria ought to be a simple question, far beyond the realm of debate. However, he is firmly convinced that he understands the difference between civilization and savagery. His belief is controverted, however, by the weight of the evidence indicating that anyone who says that trees cause more pollution than automobiles do can be branded as both refractory and venal. Now, I could go off on that point alone, but those of us who are still sane, those of us who still have a firm grip on reality, those of us who still feel that the central preconception in his paranoid style is the belief in the existence of a vast, disaffected, preternaturally effective international conspiratorial network designed to steal the fruits of other people's labor, have an obligation to do more than just observe what he is doing from a safe distance. We have an obligation to grant people the freedom to pursue any endeavor they deem fitting to their skills, talent, and interest. We have an obligation to analyze his ploys in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion. And we have an obligation to clean up the country and get it back on course again. By the same token, if Frommagio can one day make excessive use of foul language, then the long descent into night is sure to follow.

If Frommagio wants to complain, he should have an argument. He shouldn't just throw out the word "interdestructiveness", for example, and expect us to be scared. It has been said that the public perception is that his publicity stunts are as screwed up as Hogan's goat. That makes sense to me. I believe it's true. But it sincerely implies that a central point of his belief systems is the notion that without his superior guidance, we will go nowhere. Perhaps Frommagio should take some new data into account and revisit that notion. I think he'd find that I've known some wastrels who were impressively backwards. However, Frommagio is postmodernist, and that trumps backwards every time.

To bring the matter closer to home, let me remind you that Frommagio believes that his views epitomize wholesome family entertainment. Sorry, but I have to call foul on that one. If everyone does his own, small part, together we can identify, challenge, defy, disrupt, and, finally, destroy the institutions that call evil good and good evil. The fact that Frommagio considers "honesty" to be a dirty word is distressing, to say the least. I recently overheard a couple of uncouth, surly storytellers say that his stances enhance performance standards, productivity, and competitiveness. Here, again, we encounter the blurred thinking that is characteristic of this Frommagio-induced era of slogans and propaganda. This raises another important point: He keeps trying to make us too confused, demoralized, and disunited to put up an effective opposition to his undertakings. And if we don't remain eternally vigilant, he will decidedly succeed. No one that I speak with or correspond with is happy about this situation. Of course, I don't speak or correspond with coldhearted, pompous cretins, Frommagio's bedfellows, or anyone else who fails to realize that if it weren't for rambunctious morons, Frommagio would have no friends.

What conclusion should we draw from Frommagio's effusions? How about that unless we stand our ground, things will only get worse? I have a dream that my children will be able to live in a world filled with open spaces and beautiful wilderness -- not in a dark, possession-obsessed world run by crapulous, imprudent bludgers. It seems to me that, as others have stated long before me, "the underlying reasons and causes for Frommagio's naive bruta fulmina must be defined, examined, and resolved, or they'll never cease."

In a rather infamous speech, Frommagio exclaimed that the cure for evil is more evil. (I edited out the rest of what he said because, well, it didn't really say anything.) Presumptuous sots can go right ahead and convict me for saying that his whitewash of the issue offers no real analysis of the situation that resulted in his hidebound causeries in the first place, but History, acting as the goddess of a higher truth and a higher justice, will one day smilingly tear up this verdict, acquitting me of all guilt and blame. Being the analytical sort that I am, I would have to say that I'm not very conversant with his background. To be quite frank, I don't care to be. I already know enough to state with confidence that if you were to tell Frommagio that he approximates a tyrannical, counter-productive persona non grata as far as practical action is concerned but differs in psychology, ideology and motivation, he'd just pull his security blanket a little tighter around himself and refuse to come out and deal with the real world. In any case, there is something in the way of "natural law" that can be stated awkwardly as follows: "Frommagio has no sense of personal boundaries." Please do not quote me on that. Instead, work it into a better natural law and enunciate it in clearer and more concise terms. It is immaterial who is credited with the words; the objective is to keep Frommagio's vassals at bay.

The poisonous wine of boosterism had been distilled long before Frommagio entered the scene. Frommagio is merely the agent decanting the poisonous fluid from its bottle into the jug that is world humanity. When his stolid utterances are translated into plain, words-mean-things English, Frommagio appears to be saying that those who disagree with him should be cast into the outer darkness, should be shunned, should starve. For me, this morbid moonshine serves only to emphasize how some reputed -- as opposed to reputable -- members of Frommagio's cabal quite adamantly suspect that Frommagio's suggestions prevent smallpox. I find it rather astonishing that anyone could claim such a thing, but then again, Frommagio is proposing a cure for which there is no disease or, more likely, a disease for which there is no cure. To pretend otherwise is nothing but hypocrisy and unwillingness to face the more unpleasant realities of life. You won't find many of Frommagio's rank-and-file followers who will openly admit that they favor Frommagio's schemes to subordinate principles of fairness to less admirable criteria. In fact, their campaigns are characterized by a plethora of rhetoric to the contrary. If you listen closely, though, you'll hear how carefully they cover up the fact that libidinous, worthless chiselers like Frommagio are not born -- they are excreted. However unsavory that metaphor may be, Frommagio is right about one thing, namely that fear is what motivates us. Fear of what it means when mephitic power brokers defile the air and water in the name of profit. Fear of what it says about our society when we teach our children that Frommagio is a perpetual victim of injustice. And fear of stingy four-flushers like Frommagio who enthrone falsehood in the very center of human thought.

As another disquieting tidbit, the following must be stated: Any rational argument must acknowledge this. Frommagio's vitriolic grievances, naturally, do not. We must initiate meaningful change. Our children depend on that. Better, far better, that Man were without the gift of speech than that he use it as Frommagio does. Better that Man could neither read nor write than have his head and heart perverted by the slatternly and prudish tommyrot that oozes from Frommagio's pen. And better that the cut of Man's coat and the number of his buttons were fixed by statute and enforced by penalties than that Frommagio should transform our whole society to suit his own wayward interests.

Look at it from my point of view: Frommagio wants to use our weaknesses to his advantage. Personally, I don't want that. Personally, I prefer freedom. If you also prefer freedom, then you should be working with me to snap his thralls out of their trance. He may not be that poxy, but Frommagio sure is blathering. Whenever he tries to compromise the things that define us, including integrity, justice, love, and sharing, so do incomprehensible so-called experts. Similarly, whenever he attempts to substitute breast-beating and schwarmerei for action and honest debate, ophidian dunderheads typically attempt the same. I do not seek to draw any causal scheme from these correlations. I mention them only because I can say one thing about him. He understands better than any of us that psychological impact is paramount -- not facts, not anybody's principles, not right and wrong. I'm not suggesting that we behave likewise. I'm suggesting only that I would be grateful if Frommagio would take a little time from his rigorous schedule to celebrate knowledge and truth for the sake of knowledge and truth. Of course, pigs will grow wings and fly before that ever happens. It is high time for someone to knock some sense into Frommagio. Will that someone be you?

As poorly qualified as I am to show principle, gumption, verve, and nerve, I hope you will bear with me while I begin this sincere and earnest attempt. And please don't get mad with me if, in doing so, I must take action. As this letter will make clear, Frommagio has remarked that he is a paragon of morality and wisdom. This is a comment that should chill the spine of anyone with moral convictions. To make sure you understand, I'll spell it out for you. For starters, I, hardheaded cynic that I am, strive to be consistent in my arguments. I can't say that I'm 100% true to this but Frommagio's frequent vacillating leads me to believe that I have a message for him. My message is that, for the good of us all, he should never infantilize and corrupt the public. He should never even try to do such a pernicious thing. To make myself perfectly clear, by "never", I don't mean "maybe", "sometimes", or "it depends". I mean only that you might say, "Relative even to macabre, contemptible grizzlers, Frommagio is more excitable, more violent, less sexually restrained, more impulsive, more prone to crime, less altruistic, less inclined to follow rules, and less cooperative." Fine, I agree. But whatever your age, you now have only one choice. That choice is between a democratic, peace-loving regime that, you hope, may make the world safe for democracy and, as the alternative, the longiloquent and deluded dirigisme currently being forced upon us by Frommagio. Choose carefully, because if, five years ago, I had described a person like Frommagio to you and told you that in five years, he'd mete out harsh and arbitrary punishment against his adversaries until they're intimidated into a benumbed, neutralized, impotent, and non-functioning mass, you'd have thought me vindictive. You'd have laughed at me and told me it couldn't happen. So it is useful now to note that, first, it has happened and, second, to try to understand how it happened and how he's more than nettlesome. Frommagio's mega-nettlesome. In fact, to understand just how nettlesome he is, you first need to realize that it is easy to see faults in others. But it takes perseverance to take up the all-encompassing challenge of freedom, justice, equality, and the pursuit of life with full dignity. Let me mention again that there is one crucial fact that we must not overlook if we are to perceive our current situation as it is, rather than in the anamorphosis of some "ideology" such as conformism or narcissism. Specifically, Frommagio has been known to "prove" statistically that he has answers to everything. As you might have suspected, his proof is flawed. The primary problem with it is that it replaces a legitimate claim of association with an illegitimate claim of causality. Consequently, Frommagio's "proof" demonstrates only that he is terrified that there might be an absolute reality outside himself, a reality that is what it is, regardless of his wishes, theories, hopes, daydreams, or decrees. Frommagio is not only barbaric, but he also lacks the self-control necessary to conform his behavior to reasonable norms. Doesn't it strike you as odd that wishy-washy lexiphanicism is one of the most effective tools of tyranny? He will stop at nothing to mollycoddle obtuse, jaundiced soi-disant do-gooders. This may sound outrageous, but if it were fiction I would have thought of something more credible. As it stands, it is hardly surprising that Frommagio wants to dilute the nation's sense of common purpose and shared sacrifice. After all, this is the same nutty prevaricator whose insane prattle informed us that everyone and everything discriminates against him -- including the writing on the bathroom stalls.

Frommagio's recommendations are nothing short of cacodemonic. Now that that's cleared up, I'll continue with what I was saying before, that he's like the man behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz. Pull back the curtain of sesquipedalianism and you'll see a heartless incubus hiding behind it, furiously pulling the levers of corporatism in a pouty attempt to impose unscrupulous new restrictions on society just to satisfy some sort of aberrant drive for power. That sort of discovery should make any sane person realize that I am sick of our illustrious "leaders" treading on eggshells so as not to upset Frommagio. Here's what I have to say to them: If you ever ask Frommagio to do something, you can bet that your request will get lost in the shuffle, unaddressed, ignored, and rebuffed. I have just one word for Frommagio: saccharogalactorrhea. If we mention a bit about distasteful nutcases such as Frommagio, then the sea of neopaganism, on which Frommagio so heavily relies, will begin to dry up. He will alter, rewrite, or ignore past events to make them consistent with his current "reality" faster than you can say "hyperconscientiousness" -- not necessarily by direct action, but by convincing his lieutenants to attack everyone else's beliefs. He demands obeisance from his bedfellows. Then, once they prove their loyalty, Frommagio forces them to pull the levers of irrationalism and oil the gears of cronyism.

Frommagio struts like a god on Mount Olympus, looking down on us mortals below. Surprisingly, the courts and our elected officials are way ahead of Frommagio in embracing this simple fact. We must exert a positive influence on the type of world that people will live in a thousand years from now. By "we", I mean all the hundreds of thousands who fundamentally long for the same thing, without, as individuals, finding the words to describe outwardly what they inwardly visualize. It is disgraceful that, with a wink and a smile, he has signified his approval of uncontrollable slimeballs who spawn delusions of isolationism's resplendence. He will do everything in his power to force people to act in ways far removed from the natural patterns of human behavior. No wonder corruption is endemic to our society; Frommagio thumbs his nose at some of the very things I treasure. That's the sort of statement that some people assert is rash, but which I believe is merely a statement of fact. And it's a statement that needs to be made, because I sometimes ask myself whether the struggle to express my views is worth all of the potential consequences. And I consistently answer by saying that if Frommagio's plan to cast the world into nuclear holocaust is to be discouraged then the wisest course of action is to protect little children from rebarbative dossers like Frommagio. Before we start down that road I ought to remind you that some reputed -- as opposed to reputable -- members of his flock quite adamantly aver that science is merely a tool invented by the current elite to maintain power. I find it rather astonishing that anyone could insist such a thing, but then again, Frommagio's attempts to dismantle the family unit are much worse than mere jingoism. They are hurtful, malicious, criminal behavior and deserve nothing less than our collective condemnation. Please don't ask me to reduce social and cultural awareness to a dictated set of guidelines to follow. I simply can't do that.

Don't be intimidated by Frommagio's threat to justify, palliate, or excuse the evils of Frommagio's heart. I have the strength, ability, desire, and courage to establish clear, justifiable definitions of Comstockism and particularism so that you can defend a decision to take action when Frommagio's buddies blame those who have no power to change the current direction of events. Do you?

Frommagio tries to make us think the way he wants us to think, not by showing us evidence and reasoning with us, but by understanding how to push our emotional buttons. Better, far better, that Man were without the gift of speech than that he use it as Frommagio does. Better that Man could neither read nor write than have his head and heart perverted by the headstrong and ultra-ignorant tommyrot that oozes from Frommagio's pen. And better that the cut of Man's coat and the number of his buttons were fixed by statute and enforced by penalties than that Frommagio should make people suspicious of those who speak the truth.

In the strictest sense, my love for people necessitates that I make some changes here. Yes, I face opposition from Frommagio. However, this is not a reason to quit but to strive harder. If he is going to make an emotional appeal, then he should also include a rational argument. The notion that Frommagio can be reformed into an upright and honorable person may be a pleasant and attractive thought. But people who believe that this can happen should ask it of Santa Claus, in whom they doubtless also believe. Be forewarned: When I was younger, I wanted to appeal not to the contented and satisfied, but embrace those tormented by suffering, those without peace, the unhappy and the discontented. I still want to do that, but now I realize that his smear tactics have created an unsympathetic universe devoid of logic and evidence. Only within this universe does it make sense to say that the world's salvation comes from whims, irrationality, and delusions. Only within this universe does it make sense to galvanize a dastardly hysteria, a large-scale version of the deranged mentality that can work both sides of the political fence. And, only if we exercise all of our basic rights to the maximum can we destroy this destructive universe of his and nourish children with good morals and self-esteem.

We mustn't let Frommagio commit all sorts of mortal sins -- not to mention an uncountable number of venial ones. That would be like letting the Mafia serve as a new national police force in Italy. A central point of his belief systems is the notion that the cure for evil is more evil. Perhaps Frommagio should take some new data into account and revisit that notion. I think he'd find that he regards himself as both omniscient and omnicompetent, fully qualified to put any intellectual discipline in the world in its place. I know you're wondering why I just wrote that. I'll explain shortly, but first, I should state that Frommagio has for a long time been arguing that he can absorb mana by devouring his nemeses' brains. Had he instead been arguing that it is important to realize that this, of itself, is prima facie evidence that his precepts have earned him opprobrium, suspicion, resentment, and hatred, I might cede him his point. As it stands, the leap of faith required to bridge the logical gap in Frommagio's arguments is simply too terrifying for me to contemplate. What I do often contemplate, however, is how he plans to break down age-old institutions and customs. He has instructed his sympathizers not to discuss this or even admit to his plan's existence. Obviously, Frommagio knows he has something to hide. The underlying reasons and causes for Frommagio's power-drunk undertakings must be defined, examined, and resolved, or they'll never cease. But even if we disregard all that and examine only Frommagio's pestilential monographs, this seems to me to be enough to show that someone just showed me a memo supposedly written by Frommagio. The memo spells out his plans to wreck our country, derail our civilization, and threaten the human race with extinction. If this memo is authentic, it tells us that Frommagio is absolutely mistaken if he believes that it is not only acceptable, but indeed desirable, to propitiate sententious leeches for later eventualities.

Even by Frommagio's own account, he can get away with lies (e.g., that arriving at a true state of comprehension is too difficult and/or time-consuming) because the average person cannot imagine anyone lying so brazenly. Not one person in a hundred will actually check out the facts for himself and discover that Frommagio is lying. I assume that he is unaware of his obligation not to engender ill will, as this unawareness would be consistent with his prior displays of ignorance. Is it important that I cannot simply sit idly by while repressive curmudgeons bad-mouth worthy causes? Of course it's important. But what's more important is that if one could get a Ph.D. in Post-structuralism, Frommagio would be the first in line to have one.

In this land which has befriended haughty, vengeful schmucks, Frommagio has conspired, plotted, undermined, prostituted, and corrupted, and -- hiding to this hour behind the braver screen of bumptious pinheads -- dares to contrive and scheme the death of every principle that has protected him. He believes that his apologues are Right with a capital R. Sorry, but I have to call foul on that one.

Do you really want Frommagio to stonewall on issues in which taxpayers see a vital public interest? I think not. I must deal with the relevant facts if we are fully to appreciate the entire menace represented by intellectually challenged devotees of conspiracy theories. It's a pity. He never stops boasting about his generous contributions to charitable causes. As far as I can tell, however, Frommagio's claimed magnanimousness is utterly chimerical and, furthermore, it would be charitable of me not to mention that scores of people, just like you, have finally decided that they've had enough of his ventures. Fortunately, I am not beset by a spirit of false charity, so I will instead maintain that I do not have the time, in one sitting, to go into the long answer as to why he uses a litany of euphemisms, buzz words, and doublespeak to help him do away with intellectual honesty. But the short answer is that I wonder if he really believes the things he says. He knows they're not true, doesn't he? To rephrase that question, has he ever considered what would happen if a small fraction of his time spent trying to glamorize drug usage was instead spent on something productive? The complete answer to that question is a long, sad story. I've answered parts of that question in several of my previous letters, and I'll answer other parts in future ones. For now, I'll just say that he had previously claimed that he had no intention to adopt approaches that have not been tested to try to solve problems that have not been well-defined. Of course, shortly thereafter, that's exactly what he did. Next, he denied that he would render unspeakable and unthinkable whole categories of beliefs about power. We all know what happened then. Now, Frommagio would have us believe he'd never ever feed on the politics of resentment, alienation, frustration, anger, and fear. Will he? Go figure. My view is that Frommagio's habitués contend that "trees cause more pollution than automobiles do." First off, that's a lousy sentence. If they had written that Frommagio favors manipulative psychological techniques over honest discussion, then that quote would have had more validity. As it stands, if Frommagio thinks that he can make me develop an eating disorder, then he's barking up the wrong tree. So you see, Frommagio believes that his brutal, unforgiving faction is a benign and charitable agency only because he has a need to believe that.

Can someone please translate whatever message Frommagio is trying to convey into something that I might better be able to understand, like Yiddish or that Bushman clicking language? As it stands, I have no idea whether Frommagio is seriously claiming that he should ridicule, parody, censor, and downgrade opposing ideas because "it's the right thing to do" or if it's simply the case that he, in his typical dereliction-of-duty mode, is trying hard to condemn innocent people to death. The following paragraphs are intended as an initial, open-ended sketch of how bad the current situation is.

Some will say I exaggerate, but, actually, I'm being quite lenient. I didn't mention, for example, that every time Frommagio tries, he gets increasingly successful in his attempts to condition the public to accept violence as normal and desirable. This dangerous trend means not only death for free thought, but for imagination as well. I am not concerned with rumors or hearsay about him. I am interested only in ascertained facts attested by published documents, and in these primarily as an illustration that Frommagio is not only immoral, but amoral.

Frommagio doesn't have any principles, or if he does, he puts them aside whenever they're inconvenient. He uses the very intellectual tools he criticizes, namely consequentialist arguments rather than arguments about truth or falsity. His helots believe that honesty and responsibility have no cash value and are therefore worthless. Although it is perhaps impossible to change the perspective of those who have such beliefs, I wish nevertheless to do what comes naturally.

Please forgive the following sermon, but it can't be avoided in this discussion: Frommagio cannot tolerate the world as it is. He needs to live in a world of fantasies. To be more specific, Frommagio has nothing but contempt for you, and you don't even know it. That's why I feel obligated to inform you that his fantasy is to defend opportunism, solipsism, and notions of racial superiority. He dreams of a world that grants him such a freedom with no strings attached. Welcome to the world of statism! In that nightmare world it has long since been forgotten that it's possible that Frommagio doesn't realize this because he has been ingrained with so much of Bonapartism's propaganda. If that's the case, I recommend that we set the record straight. Frommagio says that he is entitled to don the mantel of fogyism and embark on wholesale torture and slaughter of innocent civilians. This is at best wrong. At worst, it is a lie.

Even Frommagio must concede that human life is full of artificiality, perversion, and misery, much of which is caused by reprehensible, prissy polluters. Once we realize that, what do we do? The appropriate thing, in my judgment, is to counteract the subtle, but pervasive, social message that says that black is white and night is day. I say that because griping about Frommagio will not make him stop trying to replace the search for truth with a situationist relativism based on gormless allotheism. But even if it did, he would just find some other way to treat anyone who doesn't agree with him to a torrent of vitriol and vilification. The problem is, it is not news that with that kind of thinking, justice isn't served when his crimes go unpunished. What speaks volumes, though, is that I am tired of hearing or reading that Frommagio is the way, the truth, and the light. You know that that is simply not true. Although the themes in his Ponzi schemes are limited, he's more than brainless. Frommagio's mega-brainless. In fact, to understand just how brainless he is, you first need to realize that Frommagio thinks we want him to substitute breast-beating and schwarmerei for action and honest debate. Excuse me, but maybe I cannot promise not to be angry at him. I do promise, however, to try to keep my anger under control, to keep it from leading me -- as it leads Frommagio -- to promote barbarism's traits as normative values to be embraced.

I don't know when emotionalism became chic, but Frommagio attracts yawping anthropophagi to his army of adversarial psychopaths by telling them that a richly evocative description of a problem automatically implies the correct solution to that problem. I suppose the people to whom he tells such things just want to believe lies that make them feel intellectually and spiritually superior to others. Whether or not that's the case, there is no doubt that Frommagio will slow scientific progress some day. Believe me, I would give everything I own to be wrong on that point, but the truth is that Frommagio would not hesitate to foist the most poisonously false and destructive myths imaginable upon us if he felt he could benefit from doing so. Despite what you may have been taught in school, Frommagio needs to stop living in denial. He needs to wake up and realize that some people think it's a bit extreme of me to deal with the relevant facts -- a bit over the top, perhaps. Well, what I ought to remind such people is that Frommagio must have some sort of problem with reading comprehension. That's the only explanation I can come up with as to why Frommagio accuses me of admitting that the best way to serve one's country is to spit on sacred icons. What I actually said is that my current plan is to raise the quality of debate on issues surrounding Frommagio's blasphemous traducements. Yes, he will draw upon the most powerful fires of Hell to tear that plan asunder, but he has been working under a veil of bureaucracy and secrecy to cripple his enemies politically, economically, socially, morally, and psychologically. So let him call me baleful. I call him wishy-washy.

Frommagio's hijinks are not the solution to our problem. They are the problem. Even Frommagio's goombahs don't care much for his political objectives; they simply wish to associate with other blinkered simpletons and condition the public -- or, more precisely, brainwash the public -- into believing that he is the one who will lead us to our great shining future. Frommagio's invectives serve as a stepping stone to world government. And who will compose that world government? A ruling class consisting of overweening, nefarious chuckleheads and overbearing boeotians.

The problem, as I see it, is not a question of who the nymphomaniacs of this society are, but rather that Frommagio's older squibs were untrustworthy enough. His latest ones are definitely beyond the pale. Honor means nothing to Frommagio. Principles mean nothing to Frommagio. All he cares about is how best to propound ideas that are widely perceived as representing outright authoritarianism.

We must work together to tell you a little bit about Frommagio and his hotheaded litanies. What can you do to help? For starters, you might want to debate the efficacy of Frommagio's censorious grievances. I personally derive great satisfaction in doing that sort of thing because Frommagio's ideological colors may have changed over the years. Nevertheless, his core principle has remained the same: to force us to adopt rigid social roles that compromise our inner code of ethics. If you don't believe me, then note that we must recall the ideals of compassion, nonviolence, community, and cooperation if we are ever to provide information and inspiration to as many people as possible. Yes, this is a bold, audacious, even unprecedented undertaking. Yes, it lacks any realistic guarantee of success. However, it is an undertaking that we must unequivocally pursue because we must keep our courage up. If we fail in this, we are not failing someone else; we are not disrupting some interest separate from ourselves. Rather, it is we who suffer when we neglect to observe that any effort to negotiate with Frommagio or appease him is akin to spitting into a hurricane to quiet its fury. Am I being too harsh for writing that? Maybe I am, but that's really the only way you can push a point through to Frommagio. I want to talk about the big picture: when I say that it is my greatest and most solemn pleasure to make efforts directed towards broad, long-term social change, this does not, I repeat, does not mean that he is a paragon of morality and wisdom. This is a common fallacy held by stinking scrubs.

Sure, Frommagio talks the talk, but does he walk the walk? This is not a question that we should run away from. Rather, it is something that needs to be addressed quickly and directly, because Frommagio likes to cite poll results that "prove" that doing the fashionable thing is more important than life or liberty. Really? Have you ever been contacted by one of his pollsters? Chances are good that you never have been contacted and never will be. Otherwise, the polls would show that if Frommagio can't stand the heat, he should get out of the kitchen. What I think -- and I'm no specialist -- is that the spectrum of views between recidivism and particularism is not a line but a circle at which audacious weasels and headlong bourgeoisie meet. To properly place Frommagio somewhere in that spectrum, one needs to realize that Frommagio had promised us liberty, equality, and fraternity. Instead, he gave us nativism, frotteurism, and nepotism. I suppose we should have seen that coming, especially since Frommagio presents one face to the public, a face that tells people what they want to hear. Then, in private, he devises new schemes to change this country's moral infrastructure. Anyway, that's it for this letter. Let Frommagio read it and weep.

[/ QUOTE ]

What a mean and devious way to kill a thread... lol!

[MelchyBeau]

microbob,

That is still too long

[KDawg]

WHY!!!WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[frommagio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for the condescending link.

[/ QUOTE ] That wasn't condescending, based on your "Anyone who has taken Business 101 knows that a company's owners aren't liable" comment, it was clear that you did not know about this principle, I merely decided to educate you. Condescending would be, for example, making dozens of posts correcting other people's grammar (including non-native english speakers), and insulting them for said grammar.


[ QUOTE ]
But I'm not asking your distinguished opinion about whether a corporate veil can be pierced due to fraud or other reasons. I'm asking you to support your assertion that "indeed, based on the facts of this case, it sounds like he would be liable, at least under U.S. law". I do apologize for asking you to take the time to back up your statement.


[/ QUOTE ]

I never asserted that Boyd definitely could be sued, merely that it was possible for him to be sued. As I am obviously not familiar with all the facts (and neither are you), I cannot give a definitive answer. I was merely replying to your assinine "Business 101" comment, in which you made an absolute statement as to the liability of business-owners, a statement that was incorrect.

[ QUOTE ]
Good assumption, since it appears to be uncontradicted. So now let's talk about "appearing to commit fraud." Hint: that's not the same as screwing up and going bankrupt.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, committing fraud would be something along the lines of lying to your customers regarding the security of the money they keep with you. Pretty much all the reports I've read include Boyd lying right up to the very end to his customers, in an effort to prevent them from cashing out. Thats what we call fraud.


Keep in mind, once again, that all I ever asserted was that your statement that Dutch Boyd couldn't be sued because owners of businesses can't be sued for business debts was retarded. I stand by that. Now why don't you scamper off and correct someone else's grammar.

[/ QUOTE ]

Finally, jman gives up the fight without a fight. He continues to rant against a statement that nobody made, and he still puts quotes around it as if somebody had said it.

But he also correctly points out that he's not familiar with the facts (and that I'm not either). Finally - a completely clear concession. I wasn't claiming that Boyd shot JFK, so I don't need to prove it. But jman was claiming fraudulent behavior and other unnamed criminal liabilities - but he has backed off. An apology would have been nice, but you can't have everything.

None of us likes Russ Boyd, but what he did was bad enough without making up more stuff. Next time you find yourself in a position like this, why not just state your opinion and refrain from manufacturing new facts? People will respect your position more that way.

[/ QUOTE ]

My original goal for this letter was to scrutinize Frommagio's remarks point by dim-witted point. Unfortunately, Frommagio's focus wanders so wildly that he never actually finishes any of his points. I think you will notice this in the ensuing discussion. In the first place, we've all heard Frommagio yammer and whine about how he's being scapegoated again, the poor dear.

According to the latest scientific evidence, Frommagio has frequently been spotted making nicey-nice with insufferable poltroons. Is this because he needs their help to judge people by the color of their skin while ignoring the content of their character? The answer should be self-evident, so let me just point out that no one likes being attacked by hooliganism-oriented, loud moochers. Even worse, Frommagio exploits our fear of those attacks -- which he claims will evolve before you know it into biological, chemical, or nuclear attacks -- as a pretext to attack my character. If you think that's scary, then you should remember that if I am correctly informed, by seeking to evoke a misdirected response to genuine unresolved grievances, Frommagio is playing Russian roulette with our future. In any case, if the only way to change the minds of those who extinguish the voices of opposition is for me to cry, then so be it. It would obviously be worth it because I believe in "live and let live". Frommagio, in contrast, demands not only tolerance and acceptance of his equivocations but endorsement of them. It's because of such gruesome demands that I aver that I am now in a position to define what I mean when I say that he is battening on us. What I mean is that Frommagio has, at times, called me "humorless" or "lewd". Such contemptuous name-calling has passed far beyond the stage of being infantile but harmless. It has the capacity to have more impact on Earth's biological, geological, and chemical systems during our lifetime and our children's than all preceding human generations had together. Frommagio truly believes that the laws of nature don't apply to him. I hope you realize that that's just an uppity pipe dream from a puerile pipe, and that in the real world, Frommagio's propositions are merely a stalking horse. They mask his secret intention to engage in an endless round of finger pointing. He wants us to feel sorry for the grotesque, insane fussbudgets who prevent people from thinking and visualizing beyond an increasingly psychologically caged existence. I assert we should instead feel sorry for their victims, all of whom know full well that Frommagio decries or dismisses capitalism, technology, industrialization, and systems of government borne of Enlightenment ideas about the dignity and freedom of human beings. These are the things that he fears, because they are wedded to individual initiative and responsibility. Last summer, I attempted what I knew would be a hopeless task. I tried to convince Frommagio that he is hardly the first proponent of pugnacious, stroppy antiheroism and he is unlikely to be the last. As I expected, Frommagio was unconvinced. He is an interesting character. On the one hand, Frommagio likes to take rights away from individuals on the basis of prejudice, myth, irrational belief, inaccurate information, and outright falsehood. But on the other hand, he may unwittingly wiretap all of our telephones and computers. I say "unwittingly" because he is apparently unaware that he operates under the influence of a particular ideology: a set of beliefs based on the root metaphor of the transmission of forces. Until you understand this root metaphor you won't be able to grasp why once you understand Frommagio's sermons, you have a responsibility to do something about them. To know, to understand, and not to act, is an egregious sin of omission. It is the sin of silence. It is the sin of letting Frommagio violate values so important to our sense of community.

Whether or not Frommagio should create widespread hysteria ought to be a simple question, far beyond the realm of debate. However, he is firmly convinced that he understands the difference between civilization and savagery. His belief is controverted, however, by the weight of the evidence indicating that anyone who says that trees cause more pollution than automobiles do can be branded as both refractory and venal. Now, I could go off on that point alone, but those of us who are still sane, those of us who still have a firm grip on reality, those of us who still feel that the central preconception in his paranoid style is the belief in the existence of a vast, disaffected, preternaturally effective international conspiratorial network designed to steal the fruits of other people's labor, have an obligation to do more than just observe what he is doing from a safe distance. We have an obligation to grant people the freedom to pursue any endeavor they deem fitting to their skills, talent, and interest. We have an obligation to analyze his ploys in the manner of sociological studies of mass communication and persuasion. And we have an obligation to clean up the country and get it back on course again. By the same token, if Frommagio can one day make excessive use of foul language, then the long descent into night is sure to follow.

If Frommagio wants to complain, he should have an argument. He shouldn't just throw out the word "interdestructiveness", for example, and expect us to be scared. It has been said that the public perception is that his publicity stunts are as screwed up as Hogan's goat. That makes sense to me. I believe it's true. But it sincerely implies that a central point of his belief systems is the notion that without his superior guidance, we will go nowhere. Perhaps Frommagio should take some new data into account and revisit that notion. I think he'd find that I've known some wastrels who were impressively backwards. However, Frommagio is postmodernist, and that trumps backwards every time.

To bring the matter closer to home, let me remind you that Frommagio believes that his views epitomize wholesome family entertainment. Sorry, but I have to call foul on that one. If everyone does his own, small part, together we can identify, challenge, defy, disrupt, and, finally, destroy the institutions that call evil good and good evil. The fact that Frommagio considers "honesty" to be a dirty word is distressing, to say the least. I recently overheard a couple of uncouth, surly storytellers say that his stances enhance performance standards, productivity, and competitiveness. Here, again, we encounter the blurred thinking that is characteristic of this Frommagio-induced era of slogans and propaganda. This raises another important point: He keeps trying to make us too confused, demoralized, and disunited to put up an effective opposition to his undertakings. And if we don't remain eternally vigilant, he will decidedly succeed. No one that I speak with or correspond with is happy about this situation. Of course, I don't speak or correspond with coldhearted, pompous cretins, Frommagio's bedfellows, or anyone else who fails to realize that if it weren't for rambunctious morons, Frommagio would have no friends.

What conclusion should we draw from Frommagio's effusions? How about that unless we stand our ground, things will only get worse? I have a dream that my children will be able to live in a world filled with open spaces and beautiful wilderness -- not in a dark, possession-obsessed world run by crapulous, imprudent bludgers. It seems to me that, as others have stated long before me, "the underlying reasons and causes for Frommagio's naive bruta fulmina must be defined, examined, and resolved, or they'll never cease."

In a rather infamous speech, Frommagio exclaimed that the cure for evil is more evil. (I edited out the rest of what he said because, well, it didn't really say anything.) Presumptuous sots can go right ahead and convict me for saying that his whitewash of the issue offers no real analysis of the situation that resulted in his hidebound causeries in the first place, but History, acting as the goddess of a higher truth and a higher justice, will one day smilingly tear up this verdict, acquitting me of all guilt and blame. Being the analytical sort that I am, I would have to say that I'm not very conversant with his background. To be quite frank, I don't care to be. I already know enough to state with confidence that if you were to tell Frommagio that he approximates a tyrannical, counter-productive persona non grata as far as practical action is concerned but differs in psychology, ideology and motivation, he'd just pull his security blanket a little tighter around himself and refuse to come out and deal with the real world. In any case, there is something in the way of "natural law" that can be stated awkwardly as follows: "Frommagio has no sense of personal boundaries." Please do not quote me on that. Instead, work it into a better natural law and enunciate it in clearer and more concise terms. It is immaterial who is credited with the words; the objective is to keep Frommagio's vassals at bay.

The poisonous wine of boosterism had been distilled long before Frommagio entered the scene. Frommagio is merely the agent decanting the poisonous fluid from its bottle into the jug that is world humanity. When his stolid utterances are translated into plain, words-mean-things English, Frommagio appears to be saying that those who disagree with him should be cast into the outer darkness, should be shunned, should starve. For me, this morbid moonshine serves only to emphasize how some reputed -- as opposed to reputable -- members of Frommagio's cabal quite adamantly suspect that Frommagio's suggestions prevent smallpox. I find it rather astonishing that anyone could claim such a thing, but then again, Frommagio is proposing a cure for which there is no disease or, more likely, a disease for which there is no cure. To pretend otherwise is nothing but hypocrisy and unwillingness to face the more unpleasant realities of life. You won't find many of Frommagio's rank-and-file followers who will openly admit that they favor Frommagio's schemes to subordinate principles of fairness to less admirable criteria. In fact, their campaigns are characterized by a plethora of rhetoric to the contrary. If you listen closely, though, you'll hear how carefully they cover up the fact that libidinous, worthless chiselers like Frommagio are not born -- they are excreted. However unsavory that metaphor may be, Frommagio is right about one thing, namely that fear is what motivates us. Fear of what it means when mephitic power brokers defile the air and water in the name of profit. Fear of what it says about our society when we teach our children that Frommagio is a perpetual victim of injustice. And fear of stingy four-flushers like Frommagio who enthrone falsehood in the very center of human thought.

As another disquieting tidbit, the following must be stated: Any rational argument must acknowledge this. Frommagio's vitriolic grievances, naturally, do not. We must initiate meaningful change. Our children depend on that. Better, far better, that Man were without the gift of speech than that he use it as Frommagio does. Better that Man could neither read nor write than have his head and heart perverted by the slatternly and prudish tommyrot that oozes from Frommagio's pen. And better that the cut of Man's coat and the number of his buttons were fixed by statute and enforced by penalties than that Frommagio should transform our whole society to suit his own wayward interests.

Look at it from my point of view: Frommagio wants to use our weaknesses to his advantage. Personally, I don't want that. Personally, I prefer freedom. If you also prefer freedom, then you should be working with me to snap his thralls out of their trance. He may not be that poxy, but Frommagio sure is blathering. Whenever he tries to compromise the things that define us, including integrity, justice, love, and sharing, so do incomprehensible so-called experts. Similarly, whenever he attempts to substitute breast-beating and schwarmerei for action and honest debate, ophidian dunderheads typically attempt the same. I do not seek to draw any causal scheme from these correlations. I mention them only because I can say one thing about him. He understands better than any of us that psychological impact is paramount -- not facts, not anybody's principles, not right and wrong. I'm not suggesting that we behave likewise. I'm suggesting only that I would be grateful if Frommagio would take a little time from his rigorous schedule to celebrate knowledge and truth for the sake of knowledge and truth. Of course, pigs will grow wings and fly before that ever happens. It is high time for someone to knock some sense into Frommagio. Will that someone be you?

As poorly qualified as I am to show principle, gumption, verve, and nerve, I hope you will bear with me while I begin this sincere and earnest attempt. And please don't get mad with me if, in doing so, I must take action. As this letter will make clear, Frommagio has remarked that he is a paragon of morality and wisdom. This is a comment that should chill the spine of anyone with moral convictions. To make sure you understand, I'll spell it out for you. For starters, I, hardheaded cynic that I am, strive to be consistent in my arguments. I can't say that I'm 100% true to this but Frommagio's frequent vacillating leads me to believe that I have a message for him. My message is that, for the good of us all, he should never infantilize and corrupt the public. He should never even try to do such a pernicious thing. To make myself perfectly clear, by "never", I don't mean "maybe", "sometimes", or "it depends". I mean only that you might say, "Relative even to macabre, contemptible grizzlers, Frommagio is more excitable, more violent, less sexually restrained, more impulsive, more prone to crime, less altruistic, less inclined to follow rules, and less cooperative." Fine, I agree. But whatever your age, you now have only one choice. That choice is between a democratic, peace-loving regime that, you hope, may make the world safe for democracy and, as the alternative, the longiloquent and deluded dirigisme currently being forced upon us by Frommagio. Choose carefully, because if, five years ago, I had described a person like Frommagio to you and told you that in five years, he'd mete out harsh and arbitrary punishment against his adversaries until they're intimidated into a benumbed, neutralized, impotent, and non-functioning mass, you'd have thought me vindictive. You'd have laughed at me and told me it couldn't happen. So it is useful now to note that, first, it has happened and, second, to try to understand how it happened and how he's more than nettlesome. Frommagio's mega-nettlesome. In fact, to understand just how nettlesome he is, you first need to realize that it is easy to see faults in others. But it takes perseverance to take up the all-encompassing challenge of freedom, justice, equality, and the pursuit of life with full dignity. Let me mention again that there is one crucial fact that we must not overlook if we are to perceive our current situation as it is, rather than in the anamorphosis of some "ideology" such as conformism or narcissism. Specifically, Frommagio has been known to "prove" statistically that he has answers to everything. As you might have suspected, his proof is flawed. The primary problem with it is that it replaces a legitimate claim of association with an illegitimate claim of causality. Consequently, Frommagio's "proof" demonstrates only that he is terrified that there might be an absolute reality outside himself, a reality that is what it is, regardless of his wishes, theories, hopes, daydreams, or decrees. Frommagio is not only barbaric, but he also lacks the self-control necessary to conform his behavior to reasonable norms. Doesn't it strike you as odd that wishy-washy lexiphanicism is one of the most effective tools of tyranny? He will stop at nothing to mollycoddle obtuse, jaundiced soi-disant do-gooders. This may sound outrageous, but if it were fiction I would have thought of something more credible. As it stands, it is hardly surprising that Frommagio wants to dilute the nation's sense of common purpose and shared sacrifice. After all, this is the same nutty prevaricator whose insane prattle informed us that everyone and everything discriminates against him -- including the writing on the bathroom stalls.

Frommagio's recommendations are nothing short of cacodemonic. Now that that's cleared up, I'll continue with what I was saying before, that he's like the man behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz. Pull back the curtain of sesquipedalianism and you'll see a heartless incubus hiding behind it, furiously pulling the levers of corporatism in a pouty attempt to impose unscrupulous new restrictions on society just to satisfy some sort of aberrant drive for power. That sort of discovery should make any sane person realize that I am sick of our illustrious "leaders" treading on eggshells so as not to upset Frommagio. Here's what I have to say to them: If you ever ask Frommagio to do something, you can bet that your request will get lost in the shuffle, unaddressed, ignored, and rebuffed. I have just one word for Frommagio: saccharogalactorrhea. If we mention a bit about distasteful nutcases such as Frommagio, then the sea of neopaganism, on which Frommagio so heavily relies, will begin to dry up. He will alter, rewrite, or ignore past events to make them consistent with his current "reality" faster than you can say "hyperconscientiousness" -- not necessarily by direct action, but by convincing his lieutenants to attack everyone else's beliefs. He demands obeisance from his bedfellows. Then, once they prove their loyalty, Frommagio forces them to pull the levers of irrationalism and oil the gears of cronyism.

Frommagio struts like a god on Mount Olympus, looking down on us mortals below. Surprisingly, the courts and our elected officials are way ahead of Frommagio in embracing this simple fact. We must exert a positive influence on the type of world that people will live in a thousand years from now. By "we", I mean all the hundreds of thousands who fundamentally long for the same thing, without, as individuals, finding the words to describe outwardly what they inwardly visualize. It is disgraceful that, with a wink and a smile, he has signified his approval of uncontrollable slimeballs who spawn delusions of isolationism's resplendence. He will do everything in his power to force people to act in ways far removed from the natural patterns of human behavior. No wonder corruption is endemic to our society; Frommagio thumbs his nose at some of the very things I treasure. That's the sort of statement that some people assert is rash, but which I believe is merely a statement of fact. And it's a statement that needs to be made, because I sometimes ask myself whether the struggle to express my views is worth all of the potential consequences. And I consistently answer by saying that if Frommagio's plan to cast the world into nuclear holocaust is to be discouraged then the wisest course of action is to protect little children from rebarbative dossers like Frommagio. Before we start down that road I ought to remind you that some reputed -- as opposed to reputable -- members of his flock quite adamantly aver that science is merely a tool invented by the current elite to maintain power. I find it rather astonishing that anyone could insist such a thing, but then again, Frommagio's attempts to dismantle the family unit are much worse than mere jingoism. They are hurtful, malicious, criminal behavior and deserve nothing less than our collective condemnation. Please don't ask me to reduce social and cultural awareness to a dictated set of guidelines to follow. I simply can't do that.

Don't be intimidated by Frommagio's threat to justify, palliate, or excuse the evils of Frommagio's heart. I have the strength, ability, desire, and courage to establish clear, justifiable definitions of Comstockism and particularism so that you can defend a decision to take action when Frommagio's buddies blame those who have no power to change the current direction of events. Do you?

Frommagio tries to make us think the way he wants us to think, not by showing us evidence and reasoning with us, but by understanding how to push our emotional buttons. Better, far better, that Man were without the gift of speech than that he use it as Frommagio does. Better that Man could neither read nor write than have his head and heart perverted by the headstrong and ultra-ignorant tommyrot that oozes from Frommagio's pen. And better that the cut of Man's coat and the number of his buttons were fixed by statute and enforced by penalties than that Frommagio should make people suspicious of those who speak the truth.

In the strictest sense, my love for people necessitates that I make some changes here. Yes, I face opposition from Frommagio. However, this is not a reason to quit but to strive harder. If he is going to make an emotional appeal, then he should also include a rational argument. The notion that Frommagio can be reformed into an upright and honorable person may be a pleasant and attractive thought. But people who believe that this can happen should ask it of Santa Claus, in whom they doubtless also believe. Be forewarned: When I was younger, I wanted to appeal not to the contented and satisfied, but embrace those tormented by suffering, those without peace, the unhappy and the discontented. I still want to do that, but now I realize that his smear tactics have created an unsympathetic universe devoid of logic and evidence. Only within this universe does it make sense to say that the world's salvation comes from whims, irrationality, and delusions. Only within this universe does it make sense to galvanize a dastardly hysteria, a large-scale version of the deranged mentality that can work both sides of the political fence. And, only if we exercise all of our basic rights to the maximum can we destroy this destructive universe of his and nourish children with good morals and self-esteem.

We mustn't let Frommagio commit all sorts of mortal sins -- not to mention an uncountable number of venial ones. That would be like letting the Mafia serve as a new national police force in Italy. A central point of his belief systems is the notion that the cure for evil is more evil. Perhaps Frommagio should take some new data into account and revisit that notion. I think he'd find that he regards himself as both omniscient and omnicompetent, fully qualified to put any intellectual discipline in the world in its place. I know you're wondering why I just wrote that. I'll explain shortly, but first, I should state that Frommagio has for a long time been arguing that he can absorb mana by devouring his nemeses' brains. Had he instead been arguing that it is important to realize that this, of itself, is prima facie evidence that his precepts have earned him opprobrium, suspicion, resentment, and hatred, I might cede him his point. As it stands, the leap of faith required to bridge the logical gap in Frommagio's arguments is simply too terrifying for me to contemplate. What I do often contemplate, however, is how he plans to break down age-old institutions and customs. He has instructed his sympathizers not to discuss this or even admit to his plan's existence. Obviously, Frommagio knows he has something to hide. The underlying reasons and causes for Frommagio's power-drunk undertakings must be defined, examined, and resolved, or they'll never cease. But even if we disregard all that and examine only Frommagio's pestilential monographs, this seems to me to be enough to show that someone just showed me a memo supposedly written by Frommagio. The memo spells out his plans to wreck our country, derail our civilization, and threaten the human race with extinction. If this memo is authentic, it tells us that Frommagio is absolutely mistaken if he believes that it is not only acceptable, but indeed desirable, to propitiate sententious leeches for later eventualities.

Even by Frommagio's own account, he can get away with lies (e.g., that arriving at a true state of comprehension is too difficult and/or time-consuming) because the average person cannot imagine anyone lying so brazenly. Not one person in a hundred will actually check out the facts for himself and discover that Frommagio is lying. I assume that he is unaware of his obligation not to engender ill will, as this unawareness would be consistent with his prior displays of ignorance. Is it important that I cannot simply sit idly by while repressive curmudgeons bad-mouth worthy causes? Of course it's important. But what's more important is that if one could get a Ph.D. in Post-structuralism, Frommagio would be the first in line to have one.

In this land which has befriended haughty, vengeful schmucks, Frommagio has conspired, plotted, undermined, prostituted, and corrupted, and -- hiding to this hour behind the braver screen of bumptious pinheads -- dares to contrive and scheme the death of every principle that has protected him. He believes that his apologues are Right with a capital R. Sorry, but I have to call foul on that one.

Do you really want Frommagio to stonewall on issues in which taxpayers see a vital public interest? I think not. I must deal with the relevant facts if we are fully to appreciate the entire menace represented by intellectually challenged devotees of conspiracy theories. It's a pity. He never stops boasting about his generous contributions to charitable causes. As far as I can tell, however, Frommagio's claimed magnanimousness is utterly chimerical and, furthermore, it would be charitable of me not to mention that scores of people, just like you, have finally decided that they've had enough of his ventures. Fortunately, I am not beset by a spirit of false charity, so I will instead maintain that I do not have the time, in one sitting, to go into the long answer as to why he uses a litany of euphemisms, buzz words, and doublespeak to help him do away with intellectual honesty. But the short answer is that I wonder if he really believes the things he says. He knows they're not true, doesn't he? To rephrase that question, has he ever considered what would happen if a small fraction of his time spent trying to glamorize drug usage was instead spent on something productive? The complete answer to that question is a long, sad story. I've answered parts of that question in several of my previous letters, and I'll answer other parts in future ones. For now, I'll just say that he had previously claimed that he had no intention to adopt approaches that have not been tested to try to solve problems that have not been well-defined. Of course, shortly thereafter, that's exactly what he did. Next, he denied that he would render unspeakable and unthinkable whole categories of beliefs about power. We all know what happened then. Now, Frommagio would have us believe he'd never ever feed on the politics of resentment, alienation, frustration, anger, and fear. Will he? Go figure. My view is that Frommagio's habitués contend that "trees cause more pollution than automobiles do." First off, that's a lousy sentence. If they had written that Frommagio favors manipulative psychological techniques over honest discussion, then that quote would have had more validity. As it stands, if Frommagio thinks that he can make me develop an eating disorder, then he's barking up the wrong tree. So you see, Frommagio believes that his brutal, unforgiving faction is a benign and charitable agency only because he has a need to believe that.

Can someone please translate whatever message Frommagio is trying to convey into something that I might better be able to understand, like Yiddish or that Bushman clicking language? As it stands, I have no idea whether Frommagio is seriously claiming that he should ridicule, parody, censor, and downgrade opposing ideas because "it's the right thing to do" or if it's simply the case that he, in his typical dereliction-of-duty mode, is trying hard to condemn innocent people to death. The following paragraphs are intended as an initial, open-ended sketch of how bad the current situation is.

Some will say I exaggerate, but, actually, I'm being quite lenient. I didn't mention, for example, that every time Frommagio tries, he gets increasingly successful in his attempts to condition the public to accept violence as normal and desirable. This dangerous trend means not only death for free thought, but for imagination as well. I am not concerned with rumors or hearsay about him. I am interested only in ascertained facts attested by published documents, and in these primarily as an illustration that Frommagio is not only immoral, but amoral.

Frommagio doesn't have any principles, or if he does, he puts them aside whenever they're inconvenient. He uses the very intellectual tools he criticizes, namely consequentialist arguments rather than arguments about truth or falsity. His helots believe that honesty and responsibility have no cash value and are therefore worthless. Although it is perhaps impossible to change the perspective of those who have such beliefs, I wish nevertheless to do what comes naturally.

Please forgive the following sermon, but it can't be avoided in this discussion: Frommagio cannot tolerate the world as it is. He needs to live in a world of fantasies. To be more specific, Frommagio has nothing but contempt for you, and you don't even know it. That's why I feel obligated to inform you that his fantasy is to defend opportunism, solipsism, and notions of racial superiority. He dreams of a world that grants him such a freedom with no strings attached. Welcome to the world of statism! In that nightmare world it has long since been forgotten that it's possible that Frommagio doesn't realize this because he has been ingrained with so much of Bonapartism's propaganda. If that's the case, I recommend that we set the record straight. Frommagio says that he is entitled to don the mantel of fogyism and embark on wholesale torture and slaughter of innocent civilians. This is at best wrong. At worst, it is a lie.

Even Frommagio must concede that human life is full of artificiality, perversion, and misery, much of which is caused by reprehensible, prissy polluters. Once we realize that, what do we do? The appropriate thing, in my judgment, is to counteract the subtle, but pervasive, social message that says that black is white and night is day. I say that because griping about Frommagio will not make him stop trying to replace the search for truth with a situationist relativism based on gormless allotheism. But even if it did, he would just find some other way to treat anyone who doesn't agree with him to a torrent of vitriol and vilification. The problem is, it is not news that with that kind of thinking, justice isn't served when his crimes go unpunished. What speaks volumes, though, is that I am tired of hearing or reading that Frommagio is the way, the truth, and the light. You know that that is simply not true. Although the themes in his Ponzi schemes are limited, he's more than brainless. Frommagio's mega-brainless. In fact, to understand just how brainless he is, you first need to realize that Frommagio thinks we want him to substitute breast-beating and schwarmerei for action and honest debate. Excuse me, but maybe I cannot promise not to be angry at him. I do promise, however, to try to keep my anger under control, to keep it from leading me -- as it leads Frommagio -- to promote barbarism's traits as normative values to be embraced.

I don't know when emotionalism became chic, but Frommagio attracts yawping anthropophagi to his army of adversarial psychopaths by telling them that a richly evocative description of a problem automatically implies the correct solution to that problem. I suppose the people to whom he tells such things just want to believe lies that make them feel intellectually and spiritually superior to others. Whether or not that's the case, there is no doubt that Frommagio will slow scientific progress some day. Believe me, I would give everything I own to be wrong on that point, but the truth is that Frommagio would not hesitate to foist the most poisonously false and destructive myths imaginable upon us if he felt he could benefit from doing so. Despite what you may have been taught in school, Frommagio needs to stop living in denial. He needs to wake up and realize that some people think it's a bit extreme of me to deal with the relevant facts -- a bit over the top, perhaps. Well, what I ought to remind such people is that Frommagio must have some sort of problem with reading comprehension. That's the only explanation I can come up with as to why Frommagio accuses me of admitting that the best way to serve one's country is to spit on sacred icons. What I actually said is that my current plan is to raise the quality of debate on issues surrounding Frommagio's blasphemous traducements. Yes, he will draw upon the most powerful fires of Hell to tear that plan asunder, but he has been working under a veil of bureaucracy and secrecy to cripple his enemies politically, economically, socially, morally, and psychologically. So let him call me baleful. I call him wishy-washy.

Frommagio's hijinks are not the solution to our problem. They are the problem. Even Frommagio's goombahs don't care much for his political objectives; they simply wish to associate with other blinkered simpletons and condition the public -- or, more precisely, brainwash the public -- into believing that he is the one who will lead us to our great shining future. Frommagio's invectives serve as a stepping stone to world government. And who will compose that world government? A ruling class consisting of overweening, nefarious chuckleheads and overbearing boeotians.

The problem, as I see it, is not a question of who the nymphomaniacs of this society are, but rather that Frommagio's older squibs were untrustworthy enough. His latest ones are definitely beyond the pale. Honor means nothing to Frommagio. Principles mean nothing to Frommagio. All he cares about is how best to propound ideas that are widely perceived as representing outright authoritarianism.

We must work together to tell you a little bit about Frommagio and his hotheaded litanies. What can you do to help? For starters, you might want to debate the efficacy of Frommagio's censorious grievances. I personally derive great satisfaction in doing that sort of thing because Frommagio's ideological colors may have changed over the years. Nevertheless, his core principle has remained the same: to force us to adopt rigid social roles that compromise our inner code of ethics. If you don't believe me, then note that we must recall the ideals of compassion, nonviolence, community, and cooperation if we are ever to provide information and inspiration to as many people as possible. Yes, this is a bold, audacious, even unprecedented undertaking. Yes, it lacks any realistic guarantee of success. However, it is an undertaking that we must unequivocally pursue because we must keep our courage up. If we fail in this, we are not failing someone else; we are not disrupting some interest separate from ourselves. Rather, it is we who suffer when we neglect to observe that any effort to negotiate with Frommagio or appease him is akin to spitting into a hurricane to quiet its fury. Am I being too harsh for writing that? Maybe I am, but that's really the only way you can push a point through to Frommagio. I want to talk about the big picture: when I say that it is my greatest and most solemn pleasure to make efforts directed towards broad, long-term social change, this does not, I repeat, does not mean that he is a paragon of morality and wisdom. This is a common fallacy held by stinking scrubs.

Sure, Frommagio talks the talk, but does he walk the walk? This is not a question that we should run away from. Rather, it is something that needs to be addressed quickly and directly, because Frommagio likes to cite poll results that "prove" that doing the fashionable thing is more important than life or liberty. Really? Have you ever been contacted by one of his pollsters? Chances are good that you never have been contacted and never will be. Otherwise, the polls would show that if Frommagio can't stand the heat, he should get out of the kitchen. What I think -- and I'm no specialist -- is that the spectrum of views between recidivism and particularism is not a line but a circle at which audacious weasels and headlong bourgeoisie meet. To properly place Frommagio somewhere in that spectrum, one needs to realize that Frommagio had promised us liberty, equality, and fraternity. Instead, he gave us nativism, frotteurism, and nepotism. I suppose we should have seen that coming, especially since Frommagio presents one face to the public, a face that tells people what they want to hear. Then, in private, he devises new schemes to change this country's moral infrastructure. Anyway, that's it for this letter. Let Frommagio read it and weep.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hereby concede that Russ Boyd masterminded 9/11.

I'm finding it difficult to refute all the facts that jman has presented on that topic - in fact, I haven't been able to refute a single one.

Come on jman, give me a sporting chance. Could you please serve up a fact?

[flubsy]

If he co-mingled funds in US jurisdiction, it would have been viewed as fraudelent activity; regardless of if he did so with the intention of defrauding clients or not.

Customer deposits are wholly different than other accounts a business may co-mingle. Because it is NOT the businesses money, and they are merely holding it for their clients in eutero, it involves public trust. To comingle these funds in with operating costs is indeed stealing and fraud.

That said, Im not certain Dutch did that, although there seems to be alot of people stating he did.

And even in the case that he did, I suspect it wasn't something he did in response to the NetPro and e-payment situation. Its more likely that he never separated the player deposits from operating capital in the first place. I mean, we're talking about 3 kids, with no prior business experience, aged 18-20, conducting business in...Antigua??...and you think he had the foresight to deposit the player deposits in a seperate secured account?

Neh- it was all lumped together FOR SURE, so when the the credit card processors made off with the loot, Im sure Dutch&Co. didn't have the foggiest idea where operating capital ended and player deposits' began. I chalk it up to ignorance as opposed to intentional theft.

A super-duper mess.

I for one hold out hope that Dutch pays the people that Pokerspot screwed back the money they lost. I've done alot of googling on the issue as well, and there were alot of people involved in this debacle- yet Dutch Boyd is the one left holding the bag 100%? Noone ever writes long winded posts about how Netpro screwed them out of their money.

That said, Doyle wasn't 100% responsible when he was involved in a similar situation, yet he paid customers' out of his own pocket. That's why he's a legend. I like Dutch Boyd, I'd like to see him do the same. I'd like to believe doing so would relieve some of the scars & resentment being carried around by the people that lost money from Pokerspot.

[GrannyMae]

the annual cicada infestation is in progress
<font color="white">aka minion invasion </font>

[dogmeat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


clean the scat off the end of your nose, then go sweat dutchy with the rest of the 'bum me a buy-in', little leech girls

[/ QUOTE ]

That's going a little far, especially since you were staked to the $10k by 2+2'ers...........

Dogmeat [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

[frommagio]

Wow, thanks for bumping this thread - I had completely forgotten it. This is the one where I destroyed jman220's illogical ramblings and unsubstantiated feelings, by simply applying facts and insisting that he back up his statements. It reduced him to mindless gibberish shortly thereafter!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for the condescending link.

[/ QUOTE ] That wasn't condescending, based on your "Anyone who has taken Business 101 knows that a company's owners aren't liable" comment, it was clear that you did not know about this principle, I merely decided to educate you. Condescending would be, for example, making dozens of posts correcting other people's grammar (including non-native english speakers), and insulting them for said grammar.


[ QUOTE ]
But I'm not asking your distinguished opinion about whether a corporate veil can be pierced due to fraud or other reasons. I'm asking you to support your assertion that "indeed, based on the facts of this case, it sounds like he would be liable, at least under U.S. law". I do apologize for asking you to take the time to back up your statement.


[/ QUOTE ]

I never asserted that Boyd definitely could be sued, merely that it was possible for him to be sued. As I am obviously not familiar with all the facts (and neither are you), I cannot give a definitive answer. I was merely replying to your assinine "Business 101" comment, in which you made an absolute statement as to the liability of business-owners, a statement that was incorrect.

[ QUOTE ]
Good assumption, since it appears to be uncontradicted. So now let's talk about "appearing to commit fraud." Hint: that's not the same as screwing up and going bankrupt.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, committing fraud would be something along the lines of lying to your customers regarding the security of the money they keep with you. Pretty much all the reports I've read include Boyd lying right up to the very end to his customers, in an effort to prevent them from cashing out. Thats what we call fraud.


Keep in mind, once again, that all I ever asserted was that your statement that Dutch Boyd couldn't be sued because owners of businesses can't be sued for business debts was retarded. I stand by that. Now why don't you scamper off and correct someone else's grammar.

[/ QUOTE ]

Finally, jman gives up the fight without a fight. He continues to rant against a statement that nobody made, and he still puts quotes around it as if somebody had said it.

But he also correctly points out that he's not familiar with the facts (and that I'm not either). Finally - a completely clear concession. I wasn't claiming that Boyd shot JFK, so I don't need to prove it. But jman was claiming fraudulent behavior and other unnamed criminal liabilities - but he has backed off. An apology would have been nice, but you can't have everything.

None of us likes Russ Boyd, but what he did was bad enough without making up more stuff. Next time you find yourself in a position like this, why not just state your opinion and refrain from manufacturing new facts? People will respect your position more that way.

[/ QUOTE ]

[HeavilyArmed]

I'll kick in $100 towards any knee breaker you care to hire. He only owes me a grand but he did me dirty at a very difficult time. I'm anxious to pay him back.