Example of LIES and the *gang* sticking together

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....0f3def4795324e

Jun 30 2005

You finally provided a definition, and I accepted it. There's no
lie. I'll stop asking you for one now.

--


--Rich


http://groups.google.com/group/misc....c46f3bcb5c0d25

Aug 25 2005

There's no such thing as "*organized medicine*", Jan, until you define it.
Where is that definition, Jan?
--


--Rich


http://groups.google.com/group/misc....b08b5bb2f35161

Aug 26 2005

So, is your definition of "*organized medicine*" "those who are influenced
by the Rockefeller Foundation"? Will you stick to that?
--


--Rich

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....3641c15c2a5061

Aug 29 2005

You still have not proven a single lie on any
of them.


That is a REPEATED LIE.


http://tinyurl.com/dv7rc



Peters comments here are entirely factual. There is no lie.


Once again, the only lie is your own.
--


--Rich


http://groups.google.com/group/misc....226cce852cb08f

Aug 30 2005

First the LIAR.


Peter Bowditch.


Dr Death


I was criticised recently for lack of balance in my choices of which
forms and instances of medical fraud to feature here. The specific
complaint was that I didn't have a page on this site about Dr Jayant
Patel, late of Bundaberg Hospital in Queensland, Australia. My first
response was that I don't have a page about every quack or charlatan
in the world, not even all those whose web sites are listed here. My
second response was that Dr Patel does not appear to have a web site
himself, and nobody seems to have one supporting him. My third point
was that Dr Patel was not practising quackery but was just a
dangerously incompetent doctor. That wasn't good enough, and it was
claimed that by not having something to say about him I was condoning
his behaviour and I was exhibiting a double standard by criticising
quacks but not members of something called "evil organised medicine".
In fact, I was protecting him by not calling him a quack and it was
all part of some form of cover-up.



No lies in that paragraph.



To people outside Australia (and those within who have been in a coma
or otherwise disconnected from the world for the last few weeks) the
name Dr Jayant Patel might mean nothing, but he was a doctor who
managed to get a job at Bundaberg Hospital by lying about his
qualifications and overseas experience. It now seems that he may have
been directly responsible for the deaths of at least 87 patients. He
may not have deliberately killed them, but his negligence and
ignorance did. His hiring has revealed a huge hole in the recruitment
practices of whoever it was that let him have a job, and the extent of
the damage has shown that better methods of whistleblowing are
required. Dr Patel has fled the country and nobody knows where he is.



No lies in that paragraph.



Quackery supporters are using Dr Patel as an example of the dangers of
real medicine as compared to the absolute safety of alternatives. I
have been challenged to name a single alternative practitioner who has
killed 87 people. The facts are that real medicine has methods to deal
with disasters like this, but alternative medicine hasn't even any
useful system of adverse event reporting. There is a government
enquiry under way, the recruitment and reporting problems are being
identified and corrected, Dr Patel will be charged with criminal
offences (manslaughter at least, possibly even murder), his
extradition to Australia will be sought as soon as he is located, and
he is looking forward to a long time behind bars. This was not a case
of medical fraud, but one of a failure of management. It is a tragedy
and a disgrace, but something is being done to stop it happening
again.



No lies in that paragraph.



One delightful irony of this whole matter is that Dr Patel apparently
said that it was not necessary to wash hands between patients because
germs mean nothing. It is rather bizarre to see people holding these
comments up as examples of the incorrect thinking of real doctors when
those same people accept chiropractic, naturopathy, energy medicine,
acupuncture, homeopathy and other magical medical paradigms in which
pathogenic organisms play no part. But then, hypocrisy is never short
on the ground when quacks start criticising medicine.



No lies there either.



=====


Now Rod, The HONEST Man.



Rod is irrelevant. snip

Jan, you keep posting this same thing as "proof" of a "lie" on Bowditch's
site. Now get down to specifics and select out of the above JUST THE ONE
SENTENCE THAT IS A LIE. That's all. If there is a lie there, you should be
able to do that and tell us just what about the statement makes it a lie.
Until you can, THERE IS NO LIE THERE, and Ratbags is NOT a "lying website".
--


--Rich


http://groups.google.com/group/misc....87393b831569ea

Aug 31 2005

LadyLollipop" wrote in message

news:EknRe.78667$084.39122@attbi_s22...





So, is that the best you can do? Peter is a "blatant liar" and Ratbags is a
"lying website" because Peter did not PROVE that certain accusations were
made against him? That's way too thin. Peter's website is confrontational
and controversial, and is bound to generate all sorts of responses, so why
should we not believe that Peter got exactly the indictments he says he did.
And why should he have to prove his statements about what happened to him?
The bottom line is that you still have not exposed a single lie on Peter's
website. Your accusation that it is a "lying website" is still the lie here.
--


--Rich


http://groups.google.com/group/misc....83fd4a1a508a79

Sept 1 2005

Actually, Jan, I have absolutely no recollection of you actually proving
that Peter lied. I do recall that you have made this claim a thousand
times, and have been asked for proof a thousand times, but, all you do
is respond by saying that you already proved it. However, you never
offer such proof.


Since this is your standard operating procedure with regard to anyone
who disagrees with you, or anyone who takes you to task for your abusive
behavior and support of NetStalkers, why should anyone believe you?


Again, you snip what you do not want to deal with. I posted the truth, and


YOU CANNOT HANDLE THE TRUTH


so you snip it.


http://groups.google.com/group/misc....c47210364da330

Sept 1 2005

"Mark Probert" wrote.
.
snip lies from another proven liar, yawn

So there you go again. Mark told no lie. You snipped his comment because you
cannot handle the truth. Then you once again called him a "proven" liar. You
provided no proof; you didn't even identify the lie.


Again, the only lies are your own, and the only liar is YOU.
--


--Rich


Patel didn't wash hands between patients, inquiry told

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....da07c98f128162

Post # 3

Hulda Clark

Post # 19

Subject changed: Hulda Clark steals from the desperate


Mark Probert

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....571fa666d52381

http://groups.google.com/group/misc....56c5ff4f30cf8a

Have you ever been caught lying


No.

LOL! This is another blatant lie.
Do show us where Dr. Haley's fans said he has apologized!


Do prove Mark S Probert disbarred attorney is NOT the Mark S. Probert that
posts here on this newsgroup.


Do show us Where Peter Moran was accused of LYING once for not spelling
"syncrometer" correctly.


Just WHERE was it claimed that you were condoning Dr. Patel's behavior?????


Just WHERE did anyone say you were *protecting* him ot it was some kind of
cover up?????


Just WHERE has anyone one said there was absolute safety in alternative??


Just WHERE has anyone demanded evidence that anyone said or believed that
liver flukes cause cancer?


Just WHERE has anyone one *said* that liver flukers cause cancer on the
newsgroup as of the date you you changed the wording?


Just WHO is a strong supporter of cancer quack Hulda Clark?


MANY OF THESE LIES ARE ON PETER'S WEBSITES!!!!



"Peter Bowditch" wrote:
"Jan Drew" wrote:

"Peter Bowditch" wrote:
"Jan Drew" wrote:


"Peter Bowditch" wrote:
"Jan Drew" wrote:


"Peter Bowditch" wrote;
"Max C." wrote:


Mr. Moran, by chance are you familiar with the work of Dr. Otto
Warburg?


Max.


It's Dr Moran, and why would he need to know about Otto Warburg, who
won a Nobel Prize "for his discovery of the nature and mode of
action
of the respiratory enzyme"? Otto Warburg's


It is Dr Otto Warburg and his research DID have to do with cancer
despite
what known and
proven liar, Peter Bowditch has to say.


http://www.stopcancer.com/ottolecture3.htm


One must ask, then, why the word "cancer" appears ZERO times in Dr
Warburg's 1931 Nobel acceptance speech.


YOU may ask that...


And you may answer if you like.


There are however, MANY references to CANCER in the very subject
relating
to the Nobel Prize won by *DR* Warburg.


There is ONE mention of cancer in the Presentation Speech by Professor
E. Hammarsten.


OOPPSEY.


STILL talking out of both sides of your mouth, I see....


Now....just *WHERE* is DR Warburg's Nobel *acceptance* speech?


You snipped it.



NO, I did not snip it.


That means I am entitled to say "**** off". In fact,



you called it a "diversion". See below before you start on the "Liar"
stuff.


In FACT, I called a diversion EXACTLY this:


There is, however, an oblique reference to the uselessness of laetrile
in the treatment of cancer when he says "I will mention here two
substances that can specifically and reversibly inhibit respiration in
living substance: hydrocyanic acid (for historical reasons)and carbon
monoxide (for other reasons)".


Read the whole thing at
http://nobelprize.org/medicine/laure...rg-lecture.pdf,
unless you choose to think that the Nobel committee are part of the
great organised medicine conspiracy.


Now....just *WHERE* is DR Warburg's Nobel *acceptance* speech?


The above is L E C T U R E, NOT an *acceptance* speech!



If you think that one is "MANY" then I am not surprised
that you believe that 1=2.


I am NOT surprised to see you try to DECEIVE, as is your HABIT!!


When caught, you....insult.....


"The medical world expects great things from your experiments on
cancer and other tumours, experiments which seem already to be
sufficiently far advanced to be able to furnish an explanation for at
least one cause of the destructive and unlimited growth of these
tumours".


Professor Hammarsten then went on to say what Dr Warburg was getting
his ONLY Nobel Prize for. You might like to point out where the word
"cancer" appears".


"Your discovery about the nature and effect of the ferment of
respiration, which the Caroline Institute is rewarding this year with
Alfred Nobel's Prize for Physiology or Medicine ..."


snip


What Jan snipped was


In part, your usual diversion about another subject....


Dr Warburg's Nobel lecture, in which he mentions
cancer ZERO times. Why did you snip it Jan -


I just told you.


See - there's where you admit



See - there's where I just told you why I snipped it......


I admitted nothing.


that I posted Dr Warburg's speech


OOPPPSEY.


What happened to *acceptance* speech?


STILL deceiving!!!


STILL caught.


Out comes the vulgarity......


but you snipped it. **** off squared.


Grow up!



is allowing people to
read Dr Warburg's words "diversion"? are you frightened that people
might notice that he didn't get the Nobel Prize for cancer research.

Not even. People have the ability to make decision all by themselves.


NOT based of your DECEITFULNESS.


It would really be deceitful to claim that Dr Warburg got his ONLY
Nobel Prize for his cancer research when the person presenting him
with the gong made the point that it was awarded for something else.


research had nothing to do
with cancer, despite what alternuts have to say. And he only won the
Nobel once, not twice as mythology would have it.


*ONLY* once...


Yes, Jan, ONLY once. Therefore the statement on the site you
referenced above that he "was voted a second Nobel Prize in 1944 for
his discovery of the active groups of the hydrogen transferring
enzymes" is what is known as a LIE.


No, no, no. Deceiving, Peter... *was voted*....


Was voted by whom? If he was voted why wasn't he presented? It is an
unfortunate fact of life that if you don't get a Nobel Prize you don't
get a Nobel Prize. According to the Nobel site, Dr Warburg won the
prize in 1931. Once. Never again. Once. Not twice.


Irrevelant. Known as the Bowditch...dance...when caught....


Please explain how once equals twice, Jan.



The Nobel Prize people



think that Dr Warburg only won once. I realise that the Karolinska
Institutet is an integral part of "organised medicine", but surely
they would be the people who would know.

Care to retract your statement?


*Yes, Jan, ONLY once. Therefore the statement on the site you
referenced above that he "was voted a second Nobel Prize in 1944 for
his discovery of the active groups of the hydrogen transferring
enzymes" is what is known as a LIE.*


Was voted in FACT.... was NOT a lie.



I have removed you words and put them in the correct place.


Why should I retract a statement that someone who won only one Nobel



Prize only won the Nobel Prize once? That would be silly.


That was NOT the statement......


Ready to retract, yet?



*Yes, Jan, ONLY once. Therefore the statement on the site you
referenced above that he "was voted a second Nobel Prize in 1944 for
his discovery of the active groups of the hydrogen transferring
enzymes" is what is known as a LIE.*


Was voted in FACT.... was NOT a lie.


Ready to retract, now?



Oh, by the way,


Ready to retract, yet?


[snip, ye ole Bowditch diversion dance]



In FACT, it shows, YOU are a DECEIVER.


O what a tangled web we weave...when first we practice to deceive......


I agree it is deceptive to say that someone won two Nobel Prizes when
it is so very easy to prove that he won only one.


WHO said that?



HELLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO


WHO SAID THAT?!?!?!



YOU get caught as the ONLY LIAR........


Except the people who say that 1+0=2, of course.


WHO said that?



HELLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO


WHO SAID THAT?!?!



By the way and speaking of liars,


SEE ABOVE......


snip


Peter Bowditch



From: "Peter Bowditch"
Subject: Peter Bowditch can NOT Back Up His Claims
Date: Sunday, June 26, 2005 1:19 AM



"LadyLollipop" wrote:
Do show us where Dr. Haley's fans said he has apologized!

Do prove Mark S Probert disbarred attorney is NOT the Mark S. Probert that
posts here on this newsgroup.


Do show us Where Peter Moran was accused of LYING once for not spelling
"syncrometer" correctly.


Jan



Do **** off.


--
Peter Bowditch


http://groups.google.com/group/alt.s...b5f458996e5840

Peter Bowditch" wrote in message

...



"LadyLollipop" wrote:

"Jeff" wrote in message
ink.net...


"Ilena Rose" wrote in message
ups.com...


Never unrestricted medical license Quack Vac Flack J P UTZ proclaims:


"The reality is that the question of whether or not vaccines cause
autism has
been settled."


Only in Quackland ...


How about showing evidence that vaccines cause autism?


Jeff


It HAS NOT been settled!


Jeff didn't say


I don't need YOU Mr LIAR to tell me What Jeff did or didn't ask or say.



YOU have a whole list of LIES and claims that YOU have not backed up because
YOU made them up.


MANY of them are on your LYING websites.



--
Peter Bowditch



Like this list.


Do show us where Dr. Haley's fans said he has apologized!


Do prove Mark S Probert disbarred attorney is NOT the Mark S. Probert that
posts here on this newsgroup.


Do show us Where Peter Moran was accused of LYING once for not spelling
"syncrometer" correctly.


Do show us where you saw this :


I see that Jan has changed her question from "who says ..." to "who


believes ...".


Just WHERE was it claimed that you were condoning Dr. Patel behavior?????


Just WHERE did anyone say you were *protecting* him ot it was some kind of
cover up?????


Just WHERE has anyone one said there was absolute safety in alternative??


Just WHERE has anyone demanded evidence that anyone said or believed that
liver flukes cause cancer?


Just WHERE has anyone one *said* that liver flukes cause cancer on the
newsgroup as of the date you changed the wording?


Just WHO is a strong supporter of cancer quack Hulda Clark?


Peter has NOT proved a SINGLE one.


Peter Bowditch REPEATEDLY LIES!!!!!


Many of these LIES is ON HIS WEBSITE!!!!!


Jan


http://groups.google.com/group/alt.s...214ee54be8beac

snip things that are not evidence, even if mice are involved


--
Peter Bowditch

Oh, get a life, Jan.

You know, some people would really like to be able to find SUPPORT when
they're going through a difficult patch. But they can't find it on any
of the groups to which you ECP, because of your garbage.

Kitten

"Caitriona Mac Fhiodhbhuidhe" wrote in
message oups.com...

Oh, get a life, Jan.

You know, some people would really like to be able to find SUPPORT when
they're going through a difficult patch. But they can't find it on any
of the groups to which you ECP, because of your garbage.

Kitten

lol. Yes, I know you do not like your buddies and gang members exposed.
Mark Probert.
Rich Shewmaker.
Peter Bowditch.

Did you have anything to say about THEIR lies??

No, of course not you try to slam me. Typical for you, because you are a
liar yourself.

Jan Drew wrote:
"Caitriona Mac Fhiodhbhuidhe" wrote in
message oups.com...

Oh, get a life, Jan.

You know, some people would really like to be able to find SUPPORT when
they're going through a difficult patch. But they can't find it on any
of the groups to which you ECP, because of your garbage.

Kitten

lol. Yes, I know you do not like your buddies and gang members exposed.
snipped

No, of course not you try to slam me. Typical for you, because you are a
liar yourself.


Slam you, Jan? No, I'm just tired of seeing nothing but vitriol when I
log onto the group, especially when I'm needing a bit of support with
things going on in my life. Anything good and supportive is smothered
under the garbage posted by you and your ilk.

I'm not going to get into a discussion with you about who does or does
not lie. You'll continue believing what you believe, no matter what
anyone else has to say. But you know, it'd be nice if those of us who
NEED SUPPORT for things going on in our lives could get it, rather than
getting a dose of hatred from you and your buddies.

Kitten

snipped
Slam you, Jan? No, I'm just tired of seeing nothing but vitriol when I
log onto the group, especially when I'm needing a bit of support with
things going on in my life.

I'm sorry you're going through a rough patch. I agree, it's wearisome
to try to sort through the junk here to get to the jewels. Wish I had
an answer for that.

"Courage does not always roar.
Sometimes courage is the quiet voice
at the end of the day saying,
"'I will try again tomorrow.'"
--Mary Ann Radmacher

hth,
w

"Caitriona Mac Fhiodhbhuidhe" wrote in
message ups.com...

Jan Drew wrote:
"Caitriona Mac Fhiodhbhuidhe" wrote in
message oups.com...

Oh, get a life, Jan.

You know, some people would really like to be able to find SUPPORT when
they're going through a difficult patch. But they can't find it on any
of the groups to which you ECP, because of your garbage.

Kitten

lol. Yes, I know you do not like your buddies and gang members exposed.
snipped

No, of course not you try to slam me. Typical for you, because you are a
liar yourself.


Slam you, Jan? No, I'm just tired of seeing nothing but vitriol when I
log onto the group, especially when I'm needing a bit of support with
things going on in my life. Anything good and supportive is smothered
under the garbage posted by you and your ilk.

I'm not going to get into a discussion with you about who does or does
not lie. You'll continue believing what you believe, no matter what
anyone else has to say. But you know, it'd be nice if those of us who
NEED SUPPORT for things going on in our lives could get it, rather than
getting a dose of hatred from you and your buddies.

Kitten

Can it Kitten, you can plainly see that they lied. They post here and you
join in with their lies.
You don't complain when they lie about me, in fact you join it.

I have no ilk. They and you do. You just proved it by saying nothing about
their lies.

"Jan Drew" wrote:

KACHING!! $1 (mentioning *gang* (TING) in title)

snip huge JanRant(tm) which shows Jan continually failing to provide
evidence of lying

I think I saw some implication in the snippage that I might have been
lying at some time, so here's another two postage stamps for ACAHF.

KACHING!! $1
--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

"Jan Drew" wrote:


"Caitriona Mac Fhiodhbhuidhe" wrote in
message oups.com...

Oh, get a life, Jan.

You know, some people would really like to be able to find SUPPORT when
they're going through a difficult patch. But they can't find it on any
of the groups to which you ECP, because of your garbage.

Kitten

lol. Yes, I know you do not like your buddies and gang members exposed.

KACHING!! $1 - *gang* (TING)

Mark Probert.
Rich Shewmaker.
Peter Bowditch.

Did you have anything to say about THEIR lies??

KACHING!! $1

Keep it up Jan. ACAHF needs a new inkjet printer.


No, of course not you try to slam me. Typical for you, because you are a
liar yourself.

Maybe next month I will give a donation every time Jan calls anyone a
liar. Maybe not - I don't want to go broke.



--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

"Caitriona Mac Fhiodhbhuidhe" wrote:


Jan Drew wrote:
"Caitriona Mac Fhiodhbhuidhe" wrote in
message oups.com...

Oh, get a life, Jan.

You know, some people would really like to be able to find SUPPORT when
they're going through a difficult patch. But they can't find it on any
of the groups to which you ECP, because of your garbage.

Kitten

lol. Yes, I know you do not like your buddies and gang members exposed.
snipped

No, of course not you try to slam me. Typical for you, because you are a
liar yourself.


Slam you, Jan? No, I'm just tired of seeing nothing but vitriol when I
log onto the group, especially when I'm needing a bit of support with
things going on in my life. Anything good and supportive is smothered
under the garbage posted by you and your ilk.

I'm not going to get into a discussion with you about who does or does
not lie. You'll continue believing what you believe, no matter what
anyone else has to say. But you know, it'd be nice if those of us who
NEED SUPPORT for things going on in our lives could get it, rather than
getting a dose of hatred from you and your buddies.

Kitten

I hope you don't include me in the list of Jan's "buddies" - that
would cause her to go apoplectic. I'm trying to educate her and change
her obnoxious behaviour. My campaign is having some effect, because
there are some offences which she hasn't committed since the start of
November. I might be a little optimistic, but I would hope that one
day we can all get on with what these groups are about and Jan can
post sensible contributions and have rational discussions.

Perhaps she should post in OCD groups, where constant repetition is
the norm.

I have a particular interest in her anti-psychiatry posts, which is
why I have a KACHING!! donation going on this month for every time she
posts something from Scientology or CCHR. As she has refrained from
this so far in December I am pleased. She sailed rather close to the
wind with an article about how the TGA in Australia is supposed to be
doing something about Strattera. The article had a distinct stench of
CCHR about it, but I haven't been able to prove the link (unlike the
last time she jumped into the Australian ADHD swamp).
--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

Peter Bowditch expounded:

I hope you don't include me in the list of Jan's "buddies" - that
would cause her to go apoplectic. I'm trying to educate her and change
her obnoxious behaviour. My campaign is having some effect, because
there are some offences which she hasn't committed since the start of
November.

Well, it would be nice if you taught her outside of ASAD, because her
constant lunacy doesn't do anything to help the tenor around here.
Just snip ASAD and go at it in all the other groups, if that's what
you feel you must do.
--
Ann
e-mail address is not checked