The Judy Stein Junkyard Dog Web Site

P Duff wrote:

> He created a page in my honor.
> I had posted that his website contained nothing about me.

> He subsequently created a page in my honor, and then claimed
> that I was clueless for not having seen the page, because
> after all, here was the page for all the world to see!
>
> http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/duff.htm
>
> Of course, he was careful to not reveal in his site
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> the order of these events, because the whole thing would then
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> fall apart. This patent ex post facto fabrication would embarrass
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> any normal person, but not Andrew. He had bigger things afoot,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> including shooting himself in one of them.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

P Duff is a liar. Check for yourselves the dates on the documents. The
first page that went up to commemorate his dubious conduct was his post
dated June 24, 1998
(http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/censorship.htm.)

That was followed a few days days later by a second page
(http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/dittoheads.htm)

The page in which I pointed out his being "clueless" is dated July 1
(http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/duff.htm).

As you will see below, I posted a replay to Lawson English on a.m.t. in
which I commented about the two Web pages I added in recognition of P
Duff's shameless behavior. The message is dated June 30. The following
day, July 1, P Duff posted his "clueless" message claiming that my Web
site only had pages on Judy Stein. Later that day, I posted a reply
taking Duff to task for being so obtuse.

P Duff would have you believe that after seeing his obtuse post I
somehow went back through time to put up his Web pages and post a
message about it on a.m.t.

Would P Duff post such a defamatory statement based on such a
transparent lie? Clearly so.

I just checked DejaNews to see if there were posts on a.m.t. to document
the timing of above posts. Here is the proof of P Duff's shameless
lying: On June 30, I posted a reply to Lawson English in which I stated
that I had honored P Duff for his behavior with his own Web pages:

Forum: alt.meditation.transcendental
Thread: Transcendental Meditation
Message 8 of 12
Subject: Re: Transcendental Meditation

Date: 1998/06/30
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Author: Andrew A. Skolnick

Lawson English wrote:
>
> Andrew A. Skolnick said:
>
> >Check out the new Wep page I've set up to honor some of her
> >contributions. Less than a week old and with only a few pages, it
> >already has had nearly a hundred hits, including visitors from
> >Australia, Germany, Finland, United Kingdom, Estonia, and the
> >Netherlands. And it has already survived one failed campaign by Judy's
> >supporters to get it removed from the Internet.
> >
> >http://members.xoom.com/askolnick/junkyarddog
> > What "failed campaign?" The only guy who said he was going to do anything
> about it later recanted and never did do anything about it.

As is your habit, Lawson, you speak without a clue. P Duff posted
a message calling for an email campaign to get my server to dump
me. (To honor his effort I put his post on the Junkyard Dog site,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
the Web site he tried to deep six:

http://members.xoom.com/askolnick/junkyarddog/censorship.htm)
______________________________________________________________

That page is now found at
http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/censorshipt.htm>

Now look at the P Duff's post dated the following day, July 1, in which
he falsely claimed that my Web site only "slams" Judy Stein and no one
else:

Subject: Andrew considers drinking Judy's bathwater

Date: 1998/07/01
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Author: P Duff

Andrew A. Skolnick wrote:
>
> P Duff wrote:
> >
> > Judy Stein wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I personally hope the site stays up, and I'd discourage anyone
> > > from complaining about it. It's hard to conceive of anything
> > > that will reflect more negatively on Andrew--personally,
> > > professionally, and in his status as TM critic--than having a Web
> > > page dedicated to Andrew-style (i.e., mendacious) attacks on
> > > *his* critics.
> > >
> >
> > I had not yet complained, and shall not, as you request.
> >
> > P Duff
>
> Spoken like a true Dittohead.
>
> Duffy, what do you get out of being Judy's sycophant other than a chance
> to drink your master's bathwater?
>

Hi, Andrewl. your page might be considered hate-mongering, etc., as
I previously pointed out. But it potentially violates xoom's TOS *only
as it applies to Judy*. It isn't as if you were slamming somebody else
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
and Judy didn't think shutting you down to be important and I went along
with her, thereby allowing this third party to suffer at your hands.
Judy is the *sole* object of your objectionable behavior, and if she
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
thinks your page is a hoot and thinks its existence allows you the
opportunity to display your twisted nature, one misspelled line after
another, why should I ruin her fun?

P Duff
____________________________________________________________________

And here is my reply to P Duff the same day, pointing out how clueless
he was for ranting about the Web site without noticing that he had his
own two pages. It too is dated July 1.

Subject: Re: Andrew calls Duff's quaffing of Judy's bathwater disgusting
Date: 1998/07/01
Author: Andrew A. Skolnick


P Duff wrote:
>
> Andrew A. Skolnick wrote:
> >
> > P Duff wrote:
> > >
> > > Judy Stein wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I personally hope the site stays up, and I'd discourage anyone
> > > > from complaining about it. It's hard to conceive of anything
> > > > that will reflect more negatively on Andrew--personally,
> > > > professionally, and in his status as TM critic--than having a Web
> > > > page dedicated to Andrew-style (i.e., mendacious) attacks on
> > > > *his* critics.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I had not yet complained, and shall not, as you request.
> > >
> > > P Duff
> >
> > Spoken like a true Dittohead.
> >
> > Duffy, what do you get out of being Judy's sycophant other than a chance
> > to drink your master's bathwater?
> >
>
> Hi, Andrewl.
> The only reason I was going to complain was because your page
> might be considered hate-mongering, etc., as I previously pointed out.
> But it potentially violates xoom's TOS *only as it applies to Judy*.
> It isn't as if you were slamming somebody else and Judy didn't think
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> shutting you down to be important and I went along with her,
> thereby allowing this third party to suffer at your hands.
> Judy is the *sole* object of your objectionable behavior,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> and if she thinks your page is a hoot and thinks its existence
> allows you the opportunity to display your twisted nature,
> one misspelled line after another, why should I ruin her fun?
>
> P Duff

Hmmmm. Somebody should wake Duffy up and point him
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
in the right direction. He might start at the following
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
address:

http://members.xoom.com/askolnick/junkyarddog/duffy.htm

(Is he really this clueless, or is he just pretending?)

_________________________________________________________________

And here is my reply to P Duff when he tried to justify attacking the
Web site without noticing that it included two web pages about his
behavior. He said, "[I] saw the page start to load, saw a reference to
Judy and I left. (I certainly had no reason to read your bullshit.)" It
too was posted the same day, July 1.


Subject: Re: Andrew calls Duff's quaffing of Judy's bathwater disgusting

Date: 1998/07/01
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Author: Andrew A. Skolnick
[askolnick@nospamnasw.org]

P Duff wrote:
>
> Andrew A. Skolnick wrote: > >
> Hmmmm. Somebody should wake Duffy up and point him in the right
> direction. He might start at the following address:
>
>http://members.xoom.com/askolnick/junkyarddog/duffy.htm
> (Is he really this clueless, or is he just pretending?)
>
> Hi, Andrew.
> Thanks for the pointer. Now I know where the sycophant
> stuff is coming from. When you started all this you had written:
>
> < > chief defender of the faith, I've set up a Web site to collect and
> preserve the best of Judy Stein.
>
> The URL is http://members.xoom.com/ASkolnick/junkyarddog
> >>

> I went there, saw the page start to load, saw a reference to Judy
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> and I left. (I certainly had no reason to read your bullshit.)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

No reason, huh? Well for a reason, how about so that you don't sound
like an absolute jackass when you post critical comments about the Web
site? Unless, of course, you don't mind sounding like a clueless
jackass.

> I don't know if your page on me existed at that time or not,
> but you made no claim for it and I certainly never went back to
> your site. And since I never saw any of your posts referring to me
> as being a target of your site, I concluded that you meant
> what you had written and that Judy was your target.
> I proceeded upon that basis. That'll learn me to take you
> at your word.

What that should *teach* you is that you should read material before you
publicly attack it. Otherwise people might start feeding you oats and
put you to work hauling wagons.

You flatter yourself too much. The Junkyard Dog Web site is not about
you. It is about Judy. However, as one of her chief Dittoheads, you have
earned a mention or two.

By Duff's disingenuous reasoning, William Shakespeare was a liar for
calling his great play *Hamlet.* Why? Because the bard added the old
fool Polonius in the play yet still
called it *Hamlet.*

> Well, I'll have to give it a read and then decide what
> should happen next.

Ah, what does that mean? Another campaign to get TMers to email
complaints to my server? Which you will once again deny doing by
calling it only "toying?"

____________________________________________________________________

I thought being a clueless jackass was bad enough. But a lying, clueless
jackass is really pushing it.

Why did P Duff think he could get away with such a bald faced,
defamatory lie? I'm not certain. I have noticed that many liars are so
used to people not checking up on them, they forget that some people
will check.

In any event, P Duff clearly has earned another Web page for his foolish
defamation. I will post its URL after the page is created.

Originally posted as:
Subject: P Duff is a shameless liar
Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 21:45:52 -0500
From: "Andrew A. Skolnick"
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental