When McKelvy claimed, after 7 years, that he would shut his lying,
libelous mouth and never mention my name again or respond to my posts
if I agreed to his pathetic attempts to harass me via telephone and
give him some information, just about all of those with at least half a
brain saw through his scam. Obviously, there was (and is) no reason to
trust him, given his despicable history. Had I allowed the calls from
him to go through and then given him the last 4 digits of his cell
phone, he could simply lie about this and claim either that (a) it
never happened, or (b) the numbers that I would then publish (perhaps)
on RAO were ones that I made up. There is no question in my mind that
he has had and does not now have any intention of discontinuing his
smear campaigns and libel.

All that said, its' very tempting to expose this lying character
assassin as one who has no intention of honoring proposals that involve
termination of his compulsive need to attack me whenever he can.
(That's just one of his wide range of psychiatric problems).
Therefore, I've decided to make a counterproposal that will be far less
likely for him to cheat and sabotage. Just as there is a tape of
Krueger talking to Graham which many of us have heard and know to be a
reality, despite Krueger's denials, my proposal also involves a tape.

(1) I will designate a time for McKelvy to call the telephone number
that he claims he has recently called several times.

(2) If he calls that number at the time I specify, he will get an
answering machine with my voice and name announced, with a request that
he leave a message.

(3) He should then leave his name, telephone number, and mailing
address on the tape.

(4) I agree not to publish this information without his permission.
However, I will announce that i have received the information and post
it in a way that it can not be identified (omission of numerals and
letters).

(5) In return, McKelvy must publically stipulate on RAO - in the title
of a thread - that he will refrain from ever mentioning me or my
professional activities again on RAO. (This is no more than he
promised to do in his proposal). Further, he must agree and stipulate
that my attacks on Krueger or anybody else that attacks me DO NOT GIVE
HIM ANY EXCUSE TO JUMP IN AND START FLAMING AWAY AS HE HAS DONE OFTEN
IN THE PAST.

The reason for the tape recorded answering machine response requirement
is quite simple. Just as a part of Krueger's conversation with Graham
was posted to RAO (and a much larger, complete portion sent to many of
us), if McKelvy denies or lies about making this call in the manner
specified, I'll have proof that he's lying. Given his history, that's
a reasonable approach.
Of course, if he handles this correctly, no information will be given
out other than that described above.


For those of you who remember Gene Steinberg, after a long period of
nasty exchanges, the two of us spoke on the telephone and aired our
differences. After that, there were no more hostilities. Unlike
McKelvy, both Stewart Pinkerton and Paul Wagner, two former posters
who, like Leslie Van Vreeland, made the mistake of engaging in personal
attacks thorugh lying about my credentials - had the integrity to issue
public retractions when they quickly found out that their statements
were both false and libelous because of evidence they obtained.
Another psychologist (industrial, I think) who used to post here, and
is, I believe an acquaintance of both Nousaine and Krueger, is a man by
the name of Doug Stabler. As I recall, he lives in Palatine, Illinois,
or did the last time I corresponded with him. He also knows the truth.
McKelvy should do no less than issue a public retraction re. his
comments about my identity, professional activities, and credentials.

Bruce J. Richman a écrit :

[snip Richman's olfactive offense]

"Lionel C. Middius" wrote in message


Bruce J. Richman a écrit :

[snip Richman's olfactive offense]

Agreed.

It's quite clear that Richman lacks anything that most of us would recognize
as a life, given that he wastes so much time and bandwidth obsessing over
McKelvy and I so constantly. He's rewritten nearly the same post about us
hundreds if not thousands of time. When he's not obsessing over our very
existence, he's gratuitously attacking us. Typical Middius dupe - way past
his mental prime, deep into senile dementia and no discernable interest in
21st century audio.

Arny Krueger a écrit :
"Lionel C. Middius" wrote in message



Bruce J. Richman a écrit :

[snip Richman's olfactive offense]


Agreed.

It's quite clear that Richman lacks anything that most of us would recognize
as a life, given that he wastes so much time and bandwidth obsessing over
McKelvy and I so constantly. He's rewritten nearly the same post about us
hundreds if not thousands of time. When he's not obsessing over our very
existence, he's gratuitously attacking us.


Typical Middius dupe

100% agree.
Middius' hypocrisy doesn't need to be demonstrated anymore *but* I think
that it's with Richman that his hypocrisy reachs its climax.
Considering Middius's usual attitude toward common posters I cannot
believe one second that he feels one cent of sympathy for Bruce J. Richman.
Richman's "instrumentalization", enslavement is certainly one of
Middius' most abject achievements.

- way past
his mental prime, deep into senile dementia and no discernable interest in
21st century audio.

"Lionel C. Middius" wrote in message

Arny Krueger a écrit :
"Lionel C. Middius" wrote in message



Bruce J. Richman a écrit :

[snip Richman's olfactive offense]


Agreed.

It's quite clear that Richman lacks anything that most of us would
recognize as a life, given that he wastes so much time and bandwidth
obsessing over McKelvy and I so constantly. He's rewritten nearly
the same post about us hundreds if not thousands of time. When he's not
obsessing over our very existence, he's gratuitously attacking
us.


Typical Middius dupe

100% agree.
Middius' hypocrisy doesn't need to be demonstrated anymore *but* I
think that it's with Richman that his hypocrisy reachs its climax.
Considering Middius's usual attitude toward common posters I cannot
believe one second that he feels one cent of sympathy for Bruce J.
Richman. Richman's "instrumentalization", enslavement is certainly
one of Middius' most abject achievements.

Middius has had many such victims. Perhaps most notable was Ed Shane.

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 08:38:50 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"Lionel C. Middius" wrote in message

Arny Krueger a écrit :
"Lionel C. Middius" wrote in message



Bruce J. Richman a écrit :

[snip Richman's olfactive offense]


Agreed.

It's quite clear that Richman lacks anything that most of us would
recognize as a life, given that he wastes so much time and bandwidth
obsessing over McKelvy and I so constantly. He's rewritten nearly
the same post about us hundreds if not thousands of time. When he's not
obsessing over our very existence, he's gratuitously attacking
us.


Typical Middius dupe

100% agree.
Middius' hypocrisy doesn't need to be demonstrated anymore *but* I
think that it's with Richman that his hypocrisy reachs its climax.
Considering Middius's usual attitude toward common posters I cannot
believe one second that he feels one cent of sympathy for Bruce J.
Richman. Richman's "instrumentalization", enslavement is certainly
one of Middius' most abject achievements.

Middius has had many such victims. Perhaps most notable was Ed Shane.

No such RAO poster.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Middius has had many such victims. Perhaps most notable was Ed Shane.

Ed Shane. He's the guy who supposedly had a telephone conversation with
a George. No, wait, I thought you said George was a sockpuppet.

"Arny Krueger" said:

Agreed.

LoT;"S! ;-)

It's quite clear that Richman lacks anything that most of us would recognize
as a life, given that he wastes so much time and bandwidth obsessing over
McKelvy and I so constantly. He's rewritten nearly the same post about us
hundreds if not thousands of time. When he's not obsessing over our very
existence, he's gratuitously attacking us. Typical Middius dupe - way past
his mental prime, deep into senile dementia and no discernable interest in
21st century audio.

Irrelevant, since you're here for fun ;-), aren't you?

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

Sander deWaal wrote:
"Arny Krueger" said:

Agreed.

LoT;"S! ;-)

It's quite clear that Richman lacks anything that most of us would
recognize
as a life, given that he wastes so much time and bandwidth obsessing
over
McKelvy and I so constantly. He's rewritten nearly the same post
about us
hundreds if not thousands of time. When he's not obsessing over our
very
existence, he's gratuitously attacking us. Typical Middius dupe -
way past
his mental prime, deep into senile dementia and no discernable
interest in
21st century audio.

Irrelevant, since you're here for fun ;-), aren't you?



Also, the comments above are totally the delusional products of
Krueger's mental illness, which has been on display on RAO for many
years. Krueger's idea of "fun" is to lie, libel and misrepresent and
distort what others have actually said. Whether through deliberate
deletion of post content, taking posts out of context, or just making
up things as he has done here, he wants to be sure that we all
recognize that he's mentally ill. That wouldn't be fun for most people,
but then again, the mentally ill don't always act in logical ways - as
Krueger clearly demonstrates.
--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

It's quite clear that Richman lacks anything that most of us would
recognize as a life, given that he wastes so much time and bandwidth
obsessing over McKelvy and I so constantly. He's rewritten nearly the same
post about us hundreds if not thousands of time. When he's not obsessing
over our very existence, he's gratuitously attacking us. Typical Middius
dupe - way past his mental prime, deep into senile dementia and no
discernable interest in 21st century audio.

Improper pronoun usage noted. Improper noun/prepositional phrase
matching (as to plural/singular) noted. Unusually high amount
of obsession over someone else's supposed obsessions noted.

Bruce J. Richman a écrit :

Thank you for your proposal Bruce.
Immediatly after that you will supply us with a certificate signed by 3
of your colleagues clearly stating that you aren't insane and/or senile.
Obviously this certificate shall be legalized by the local district
attorney.

Lionel C. Middius wrote:
Bruce J. Richman a =E9crit :

Thank you for your proposal Bruce.
Immediatly after that you will supply us with a certificate signed by
3
of your colleagues clearly stating that you aren't insane and/or
senile.
Obviously this certificate shall be legalized by the local district
attorney.

As RAO's leading resident imbecile and know-nothing, words posted by
either you or your partner in lunacy, Krueger, cfan always be taken for
what they are - the rambling excretions of a fool. Which medications
did you say you were taking? The drug companies would like to know so
that they can take them off the market beford they produce similar
brain damatge in others.

Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
oups.com...



When McKelvy claimed, after 7 years, that he would shut his lying,
libelous mouth and never mention my name again or respond to my posts
if I agreed to his pathetic attempts to harass me via telephone and
give him some information, just about all of those with at least half a
brain saw through his scam. Obviously, there was (and is) no reason to
trust him, given his despicable history. Had I allowed the calls from
him to go through and then given him the last 4 digits of his cell
phone, he could simply lie about this and claim either that (a) it
never happened, or (b) the numbers that I would then publish (perhaps)
on RAO were ones that I made up. There is no question in my mind that
he has had and does not now have any intention of discontinuing his
smear campaigns and libel.

All that said, its' very tempting to expose this lying character
assassin as one who has no intention of honoring proposals that involve
termination of his compulsive need to attack me whenever he can.
(That's just one of his wide range of psychiatric problems).
Therefore, I've decided to make a counterproposal that will be far less
likely for him to cheat and sabotage. Just as there is a tape of
Krueger talking to Graham which many of us have heard and know to be a
reality, despite Krueger's denials, my proposal also involves a tape.

(1) I will designate a time for McKelvy to call the telephone number
that he claims he has recently called several times.

(2) If he calls that number at the time I specify, he will get an
answering machine with my voice and name announced, with a request that
he leave a message.

(3) He should then leave his name, telephone number, and mailing
address on the tape.

(4) I agree not to publish this information without his permission.
However, I will announce that i have received the information and post
it in a way that it can not be identified (omission of numerals and
letters).

(5) In return, McKelvy must publically stipulate on RAO - in the title
of a thread - that he will refrain from ever mentioning me or my
professional activities again on RAO. (This is no more than he
promised to do in his proposal). Further, he must agree and stipulate
that my attacks on Krueger or anybody else that attacks me DO NOT GIVE
HIM ANY EXCUSE TO JUMP IN AND START FLAMING AWAY AS HE
HAS DONE OFTEN IN THE PAST.


This is fair and straightforward offer for McKelvy. With solemn
promise to abide by this peaceful accord, I see no reason that
he dishonor this embraceable bid for resolution.

JBorg a écrit :

This is fair and straightforward offer for McKelvy. With solemn
promise to abide by this peaceful accord, I see no reason that
he dishonor this embraceable bid for resolution.

Hey Borg why don't say anything about my addendum ?

JBorg a écrit :

This is fair and straightforward offer for McKelvy. With solemn
promise to abide by this peaceful accord, I see no reason that
he dishonor this embraceable bid for resolution.

Hey Borg what about my addendum ? It's also fair don't you think so ?

Lionel wrote in message
JBorg a écrit :



This is fair and straightforward offer for McKelvy. With solemn
promise to abide by this peaceful accord, I see no reason that
he dishonor this embraceable bid for resolution.

Hey Borg what about my addendum ? It's also fair don't you think so ?




[ Lionel's Propose Addendum: ]


*****
--- Immediatly after that you will supply us with a certificate signed by 3
of your colleagues clearly stating that you aren't insane and/or senile.
Obviously this certificate shall be legalized by the local district
attorney. ---
******



I must admit:

Your counter proposal is wholly unnecessary. Signals to access sound
recordings of a voice announced is, therefrom, adequate to dispel
anonymity.

As there is faithful history of McKelvy's reign of conduct unbecoming,
the current proposal is a fair request to cease and desist a hostile
behaviour.



(Signed)

JBorg wrote:

Lionel wrote in message
JBorg a écrit :



This is fair and straightforward offer for McKelvy. With solemn
promise to abide by this peaceful accord, I see no reason that
he dishonor this embraceable bid for resolution.

Hey Borg what about my addendum ? It's also fair don't you think so ?




[ Lionel's Propose Addendum: ]


*****
--- Immediatly after that you will supply us with a certificate signed by
3 of your colleagues clearly stating that you aren't insane and/or senile.
Obviously this certificate shall be legalized by the local district
attorney. ---
******



I must admit:

Your counter proposal is wholly unnecessary. Signals to access sound
recordings of a voice announced is, therefrom, adequate to dispel
anonymity.

Because you have missed the point !!! Let me explain you.
There are 2 possible theories about Richman, to answer to the question : how
a registered licensed psychologist can have such aberrant attitude on a
public forum :

1- McKelvy's one which is un-surprisedly wrong : Richman is not a
psychologist.

2- Richman is a psychologist but he is insane (senile) and doesn't have
anymore patients.

My addendum is the only way to clear the second hypothese and to
definitively explain Richman heresy.


As there is faithful history of McKelvy's reign of conduct unbecoming,
the current proposal is a fair request to cease and desist a hostile
behaviour.



(Signed)

Lionel wrote
JBorg wrote:




I must admit:

Your counter proposal is wholly unnecessary. Signals to access sound
recordings of a voice announced is, therefrom, adequate to dispel
anonymity.

Because you have missed the point !!! Let me explain you.
There are 2 possible theories about Richman, to answer to the question : how
a registered licensed psychologist can have such aberrant attitude on a
public forum :

1- McKelvy's one which is un-surprisedly wrong : Richman is not a
psychologist.

2- Richman is a psychologist but he is insane (senile) and doesn't have
anymore patients.

My addendum is the only way to clear the second hypothese and to
definitively explain Richman heresy.


These are matters that are primarily immaterial to front issues.

It is, therefore, excluded for the record.




(Signed)

Lionel said:

There are 2 possible theories about Richman, to answer to the question : how
a registered licensed psychologist can have such aberrant attitude on a
public forum :

1- McKelvy's one which is un-surprisedly wrong : Richman is not a
psychologist.

2- Richman is a psychologist but he is insane (senile) and doesn't have
anymore patients.

I believe there's actually a third, and more likely possibility;
Bruce Richman *is* a mental health professional, but on RAO, he's
just another contributor like all of us, with all his human pros and
cons.

Why should he be judged by any other standard than anyone else on this
group?
The fact that he was pressed to mention his profession, his titles and
his practicing license, has much to do with the allogations about him
*not* being what he said he is.

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

JBorg wrote:
Lionel wrote in message
JBorg a =E9crit :



This is fair and straightforward offer for McKelvy. With solemn
promise to abide by this peaceful accord, I see no reason that
he dishonor this embraceable bid for resolution.

Hey Borg what about my addendum ? It's also fair don't you think so
?




[ Lionel's Propose Addendum: ]


*****
--- Immediatly after that you will supply us with a certificate
signed by 3
of your colleagues clearly stating that you aren't insane and/or
senile.
Obviously this certificate shall be legalized by the local district
attorney. ---
******



I must admit:

Your counter proposal is wholly unnecessary. Signals to access sound
recordings of a voice announced is, therefrom, adequate to dispel
anonymity.

As there is faithful history of McKelvy's reign of conduct
unbecoming,
the current proposal is a fair request to cease and desist a hostile
behaviour.



(Signed)

As I'm sure you realize, Lionel has never had anything concrete to say
about audio. His activities on RAO have consisted essentialy of the
following irrelevant behaviors - all of which are documented in the
Google record:

(1) The only poster AFAIK to ever engage in attacks against other
posters because of their religion - i.e. antiSemitic statements.

(2) Related to # 1, clear support of Hamas suicide bombers in efforts
to equate those with the military actions of Israel against military
targets.

(3) Ranting and raving about numerous other RAO individuals of whom he
knows nothing.

(4) Engaging in psychobabble, using terms that he can't define, can't
apply to others with any degree of validity (not even based on their
online behavior) and in general, butchering the English language far
more than any other person whose native language is not English.

(5) Repetitive lying about other people and support for Krueger, whose
lies are admired and imitated mindlessly by people like Lionel, whose
only purpose in being on RAO at all is to insult as many people as
possible.

(6) Forgery of other peoples' signatures in an effort to further
generate his juvenile form of mud slinging.

(7) Consistently avoiding the rational discussion of audio.

(8) Chronic, repeated demonstrations of gross stupidity and poor
contact with reality by making statements that nobody but a few
delusional posters such as Krueger and McKelvy have ever believed.

BJR declared:


" As I'm sure you realize, Lionel has never had anything concrete to say
about audio. His activities on RAO have consisted essentialy of the
following irrelevant behaviors - all of which are documented in the
Google record: "



Duly noted.



**************

(1) The only poster AFAIK to ever engage in attacks against other
posters because of their religion - i.e. antiSemitic statements.

(2) Related to # 1, clear support of Hamas suicide bombers in efforts
to equate those with the military actions of Israel against military
targets.

(3) Ranting and raving about numerous other RAO individuals of whom he
knows nothing.

(4) Engaging in psychobabble, using terms that he can't define, can't
apply to others with any degree of validity (not even based on their
online behavior) and in general, butchering the English language far
more than any other person whose native language is not English.

(5) Repetitive lying about other people and support for Krueger, whose
lies are admired and imitated mindlessly by people like Lionel, whose
only purpose in being on RAO at all is to insult as many people as
possible.

(6) Forgery of other peoples' signatures in an effort to further
generate his juvenile form of mud slinging.

(7) Consistently avoiding the rational discussion of audio.

(8) Chronic, repeated demonstrations of gross stupidity and poor
contact with reality by making statements that nobody but a few
delusional posters such as Krueger and McKelvy have ever believed.

**********************


All points noted above.

It is, therefore, recommended by the good people of RAO that the subject
in question shall maintained himself to an outside party. HE is, hereby,
prohibited to partake any direct involvement in the preceding.



(Signed)

Bruce J. Richman wrote:
When McKelvy claimed, after 7 years, that he would shut his lying,
libelous mouth and never mention my name again or respond to my posts
if I agreed to his pathetic attempts to harass me via telephone and
give him some information, just about all of those with at least half
a
brain saw through his scam. Obviously, there was (and is) no reason
to
trust him, given his despicable history. Had I allowed the calls
from
him to go through and then given him the last 4 digits of his cell
phone, he could simply lie about this and claim either that (a) it
never happened, or (b) the numbers that I would then publish
(perhaps)
on RAO were ones that I made up. There is no question in my mind
that
he has had and does not now have any intention of discontinuing his
smear campaigns and libel.

All that said, its' very tempting to expose this lying character
assassin as one who has no intention of honoring proposals that
involve
termination of his compulsive need to attack me whenever he can.
(That's just one of his wide range of psychiatric problems).
Therefore, I've decided to make a counterproposal that will be far
less
likely for him to cheat and sabotage. Just as there is a tape of
Krueger talking to Graham which many of us have heard and know to be
a
reality, despite Krueger's denials, my proposal also involves a tape.

(1) I will designate a time for McKelvy to call the telephone number
that he claims he has recently called several times.

(2) If he calls that number at the time I specify, he will get an
answering machine with my voice and name announced, with a request
that
he leave a message.

(3) He should then leave his name, telephone number, and mailing
address on the tape.

(4) I agree not to publish this information without his permission.
However, I will announce that i have received the information and
post
it in a way that it can not be identified (omission of numerals and
letters).

(5) In return, McKelvy must publically stipulate on RAO - in the
title
of a thread - that he will refrain from ever mentioning me or my
professional activities again on RAO. (This is no more than he
promised to do in his proposal). Further, he must agree and
stipulate
that my attacks on Krueger or anybody else that attacks me DO NOT
GIVE
HIM ANY EXCUSE TO JUMP IN AND START FLAMING AWAY AS HE HAS DONE OFTEN
IN THE PAST.

The reason for the tape recorded answering machine response
requirement
is quite simple. Just as a part of Krueger's conversation with
Graham
was posted to RAO (and a much larger, complete portion sent to many
of
us), if McKelvy denies or lies about making this call in the manner
specified, I'll have proof that he's lying. Given his history,
that's
a reasonable approach.
Of course, if he handles this correctly, no information will be given
out other than that described above.


For those of you who remember Gene Steinberg, after a long period of
nasty exchanges, the two of us spoke on the telephone and aired our
differences. After that, there were no more hostilities. Unlike
McKelvy, both Stewart Pinkerton and Paul Wagner, two former posters
who, like Leslie Van Vreeland, made the mistake of engaging in
personal
attacks thorugh lying about my credentials - had the integrity to
issue
public retractions when they quickly found out that their statements
were both false and libelous because of evidence they obtained.
Another psychologist (industrial, I think) who used to post here, and
is, I believe an acquaintance of both Nousaine and Krueger, is a man
by
the name of Doug Stabler. As I recall, he lives in Palatine,
Illinois,
or did the last time I corresponded with him. He also knows the
truth.
McKelvy should do no less than issue a public retraction re. his
comments about my identity, professional activities, and credentials.

Since Krueger and Lionel, quite predictably tried to trash and distort
the content and the above proposal, I'm reposiing it at this time.

Both Krueger and Lionel have a vested interest in the perpetuation of
the lies, insults and delusional self-serving statements that almost
all of RAO's posters associate with their posts. Their Pavlovian
conditioned responses (similar to those of a classically conditioned
dog that salivates at the sound of a bell) are quite convincing
evidence of their lack of interst in lowring the flame level on RAO.

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
ups.com...

Bruce J. Richman wrote:
When McKelvy claimed, after 7 years, that he would shut his lying,
libelous mouth and never mention my name again or respond to my posts
if I agreed to his pathetic attempts to harass me via telephone and
give him some information, just about all of those with at least half
a
brain saw through his scam. Obviously, there was (and is) no reason
to
trust him, given his despicable history. Had I allowed the calls
from
him to go through and then given him the last 4 digits of his cell
phone, he could simply lie about this and claim either that (a) it
never happened, or (b) the numbers that I would then publish
(perhaps)
on RAO were ones that I made up. There is no question in my mind
that
he has had and does not now have any intention of discontinuing his
smear campaigns and libel.

All that said, its' very tempting to expose this lying character
assassin as one who has no intention of honoring proposals that
involve
termination of his compulsive need to attack me whenever he can.
(That's just one of his wide range of psychiatric problems).
Therefore, I've decided to make a counterproposal that will be far
less
likely for him to cheat and sabotage. Just as there is a tape of
Krueger talking to Graham which many of us have heard and know to be
a
reality, despite Krueger's denials, my proposal also involves a tape.

(1) I will designate a time for McKelvy to call the telephone number
that he claims he has recently called several times.

(2) If he calls that number at the time I specify, he will get an
answering machine with my voice and name announced, with a request
that
he leave a message.

(3) He should then leave his name, telephone number, and mailing
address on the tape.

(4) I agree not to publish this information without his permission.
However, I will announce that i have received the information and
post
it in a way that it can not be identified (omission of numerals and
letters).

(5) In return, McKelvy must publically stipulate on RAO - in the
title
of a thread - that he will refrain from ever mentioning me or my
professional activities again on RAO. (This is no more than he
promised to do in his proposal). Further, he must agree and
stipulate
that my attacks on Krueger or anybody else that attacks me DO NOT
GIVE
HIM ANY EXCUSE TO JUMP IN AND START FLAMING AWAY AS HE HAS DONE OFTEN
IN THE PAST.

The reason for the tape recorded answering machine response
requirement
is quite simple. Just as a part of Krueger's conversation with
Graham
was posted to RAO (and a much larger, complete portion sent to many
of
us), if McKelvy denies or lies about making this call in the manner
specified, I'll have proof that he's lying. Given his history,
that's
a reasonable approach.
Of course, if he handles this correctly, no information will be given
out other than that described above.


For those of you who remember Gene Steinberg, after a long period of
nasty exchanges, the two of us spoke on the telephone and aired our
differences. After that, there were no more hostilities. Unlike
McKelvy, both Stewart Pinkerton and Paul Wagner, two former posters
who, like Leslie Van Vreeland, made the mistake of engaging in
personal
attacks thorugh lying about my credentials - had the integrity to
issue
public retractions when they quickly found out that their statements
were both false and libelous because of evidence they obtained.
Another psychologist (industrial, I think) who used to post here, and
is, I believe an acquaintance of both Nousaine and Krueger, is a man
by
the name of Doug Stabler. As I recall, he lives in Palatine,
Illinois,
or did the last time I corresponded with him. He also knows the
truth.
McKelvy should do no less than issue a public retraction re. his
comments about my identity, professional activities, and credentials.

Since Krueger and Lionel, quite predictably tried to trash and distort
the content and the above proposal, I'm reposiing it at this time.

Both Krueger and Lionel have a vested interest in the perpetuation of
the lies, insults and delusional self-serving statements that almost
all of RAO's posters associate with their posts. Their Pavlovian
conditioned responses (similar to those of a classically conditioned
dog that salivates at the sound of a bell) are quite convincing
evidence of their lack of interst in lowring the flame level on RAO.

Funny, to me it seems that the only one making predictable, reflexive
responses is you.

Michael McKelvy wrote:
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
ups.com...

Bruce J. Richman wrote:
When McKelvy claimed, after 7 years, that he would shut his lying,
libelous mouth and never mention my name again or respond to my
posts
if I agreed to his pathetic attempts to harass me via telephone
and
give him some information, just about all of those with at least
half
a
brain saw through his scam. Obviously, there was (and is) no
reason
to
trust him, given his despicable history. Had I allowed the calls
from
him to go through and then given him the last 4 digits of his cell
phone, he could simply lie about this and claim either that (a) it
never happened, or (b) the numbers that I would then publish
(perhaps)
on RAO were ones that I made up. There is no question in my mind
that
he has had and does not now have any intention of discontinuing
his
smear campaigns and libel.

All that said, its' very tempting to expose this lying character
assassin as one who has no intention of honoring proposals that
involve
termination of his compulsive need to attack me whenever he can.
(That's just one of his wide range of psychiatric problems).
Therefore, I've decided to make a counterproposal that will be far
less
likely for him to cheat and sabotage. Just as there is a tape of
Krueger talking to Graham which many of us have heard and know to
be
a
reality, despite Krueger's denials, my proposal also involves a
tape.

(1) I will designate a time for McKelvy to call the telephone
number
that he claims he has recently called several times.

(2) If he calls that number at the time I specify, he will get an
answering machine with my voice and name announced, with a request
that
he leave a message.

(3) He should then leave his name, telephone number, and mailing
address on the tape.

(4) I agree not to publish this information without his
permission.
However, I will announce that i have received the information and
post
it in a way that it can not be identified (omission of numerals
and
letters).

(5) In return, McKelvy must publically stipulate on RAO - in the
title
of a thread - that he will refrain from ever mentioning me or my
professional activities again on RAO. (This is no more than he
promised to do in his proposal). Further, he must agree and
stipulate
that my attacks on Krueger or anybody else that attacks me DO NOT
GIVE
HIM ANY EXCUSE TO JUMP IN AND START FLAMING AWAY AS HE HAS DONE
OFTEN
IN THE PAST.

The reason for the tape recorded answering machine response
requirement
is quite simple. Just as a part of Krueger's conversation with
Graham
was posted to RAO (and a much larger, complete portion sent to
many
of
us), if McKelvy denies or lies about making this call in the
manner
specified, I'll have proof that he's lying. Given his history,
that's
a reasonable approach.
Of course, if he handles this correctly, no information will be
given
out other than that described above.


For those of you who remember Gene Steinberg, after a long period
of
nasty exchanges, the two of us spoke on the telephone and aired
our
differences. After that, there were no more hostilities. Unlike
McKelvy, both Stewart Pinkerton and Paul Wagner, two former
posters
who, like Leslie Van Vreeland, made the mistake of engaging in
personal
attacks thorugh lying about my credentials - had the integrity to
issue
public retractions when they quickly found out that their
statements
were both false and libelous because of evidence they obtained.
Another psychologist (industrial, I think) who used to post here,
and
is, I believe an acquaintance of both Nousaine and Krueger, is a
man
by
the name of Doug Stabler. As I recall, he lives in Palatine,
Illinois,
or did the last time I corresponded with him. He also knows the
truth.
McKelvy should do no less than issue a public retraction re. his
comments about my identity, professional activities, and
credentials.

Since Krueger and Lionel, quite predictably tried to trash and
distort
the content and the above proposal, I'm reposiing it at this time.

Both Krueger and Lionel have a vested interest in the perpetuation
of
the lies, insults and delusional self-serving statements that
almost
all of RAO's posters associate with their posts. Their Pavlovian
conditioned responses (similar to those of a classically
conditioned
dog that salivates at the sound of a bell) are quite convincing
evidence of their lack of interst in lowring the flame level on
RAO.

Funny, to me it seems that the only one making predictable, reflexive

responses is you.

Failure to respond to proposal with anything other than usual
IKYABWAI-based personal insult noted. Failure to back up phony
promises about telephone calls and self-control noted. All very
predictable.

"Bruce J. Richman" said:

Both Krueger and Lionel have a vested interest in the perpetuation of
the lies, insults and delusional self-serving statements that almost
all of RAO's posters associate with their posts. Their Pavlovian
conditioned responses (similar to those of a classically conditioned
dog that salivates at the sound of a bell) are quite convincing
evidence of their lack of interst in lowring the flame level on RAO.

Bruce,

Don't make Lionel the second McKelvy.
Just ignore his posts, or try to respond in a humorous way.

In time, you'll probably have to issue another proposal like the one
you just made to McKelvy, but then to Lionel ...... :-)

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

Sander deWaal wrote:
"Bruce J. Richman" said:

Both Krueger and Lionel have a vested interest in the perpetuation
of
the lies, insults and delusional self-serving statements that almost
all of RAO's posters associate with their posts. Their Pavlovian
conditioned responses (similar to those of a classically conditioned
dog that salivates at the sound of a bell) are quite convincing
evidence of their lack of interst in lowring the flame level on RAO.

Bruce,

Don't make Lionel the second McKelvy.
Just ignore his posts, or try to respond in a humorous way.

In time, you'll probably have to issue another proposal like the one
you just made to McKelvy, but then to Lionel ...... :-)

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

I don't make proposals to proven antiSemites. McKelvy opened the
door when he made a bogus proposal designed to elicit a response which
he planned to ignore after he received it. I made my proposal to call
his bluff. If you notice his response to *my* paroposal, he gave clear
proof that he was once again lying when he made his phony claims about
telephone calls and self-control.

Also, I don't make Linel anything. He doesn't need any assistance
from me when he can have the "support" of sockpuppets Simple minds
think alike.

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
oups.com...

Sander deWaal wrote:
"Bruce J. Richman" said:

Both Krueger and Lionel have a vested interest in the perpetuation
of
the lies, insults and delusional self-serving statements that almost
all of RAO's posters associate with their posts. Their Pavlovian
conditioned responses (similar to those of a classically conditioned
dog that salivates at the sound of a bell) are quite convincing
evidence of their lack of interst in lowring the flame level on RAO.

Bruce,

Don't make Lionel the second McKelvy.
Just ignore his posts, or try to respond in a humorous way.

In time, you'll probably have to issue another proposal like the one
you just made to McKelvy, but then to Lionel ...... :-)

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

I don't make proposals to proven antiSemites. McKelvy opened the
door when he made a bogus proposal designed to elicit a response which
he planned to ignore after he received it.

Delusion of mind reading ability, noted.

I made my proposal to call
his bluff. If you notice his response to *my* paroposal, he gave clear
proof that he was once again lying when he made his phony claims about
telephone calls and self-control.

I mde no phony claims.

Also, I don't make Linel anything. He doesn't need any assistance
from me when he can have the "support" of sockpuppets Simple minds
think alike.

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
oups.com...
When McKelvy claimed, after 7 years, that he would shut his lying,
libelous mouth and never mention my name again or respond to my posts
if I agreed to his pathetic attempts to harass me via telephone and
give him some information, just about all of those with at least half a
brain saw through his scam.

Incredible that you could see through a non-existent scam. A scam that did
not involve any actual direct commumication, therefore no real harrassment.
Apparently, half a brain is all you have.


Obviously, there was (and is) no reason to
trust him, given his despicable history.

My history of asking pointed questions that you refuse to answer, like why
you made an unprovoked personal attack in the Julian Hirsch thread?

Had I allowed the calls from
him to go through and then given him the last 4 digits of his cell
phone, he could simply lie about this and claim either that (a) it
never happened, or (b) the numbers that I would then publish (perhaps)
on RAO were ones that I made up.

I never said I would use my cell phone, that number is available through
information and would have been too easy for you to claim that I called you
from it, even if I hadn't.

There is no question in my mind that
he has had and does not now have any intention of discontinuing his
smear campaigns and libel.

The only one on a smear campaign right now is you.

All that said, its' very tempting to expose this lying character
assassin as one who has no intention of honoring proposals that involve
termination of his compulsive need to attack me whenever he can.

OSAF.

(That's just one of his wide range of psychiatric problems).
Therefore, I've decided to make a counterproposal that will be far less
likely for him to cheat and sabotage. Just as there is a tape of
Krueger talking to Graham which many of us have heard and know to be a
reality, despite Krueger's denials, my proposal also involves a tape.

(1) I will designate a time for McKelvy to call the telephone number
that he claims he has recently called several times.


I said 3 times.

(2) If he calls that number at the time I specify, he will get an
answering machine with my voice and name announced, with a request that
he leave a message.

(3) He should then leave his name, telephone number, and mailing
address on the tape.

(4) I agree not to publish this information without his permission.
However, I will announce that i have received the information and post
it in a way that it can not be identified (omission of numerals and
letters).

(5) In return, McKelvy must publically stipulate on RAO - in the title
of a thread - that he will refrain from ever mentioning me or my
professional activities again on RAO. (This is no more than he
promised to do in his proposal).

Actually, I said if you agreed to my proposal and could meet my request, I
would shut up about you forever.

Further, he must agree and stipulate
that my attacks on Krueger or anybody else that attacks me DO NOT GIVE
HIM ANY EXCUSE TO JUMP IN AND START FLAMING AWAY AS HE HAS DONE OFTEN
IN THE PAST.

The reason for the tape recorded answering machine response requirement
is quite simple. Just as a part of Krueger's conversation with Graham
was posted to RAO (and a much larger, complete portion sent to many of
us), if McKelvy denies or lies about making this call in the manner
specified, I'll have proof that he's lying. Given his history, that's
a reasonable approach.
Of course, if he handles this correctly, no information will be given
out other than that described above.


For those of you who remember Gene Steinberg, after a long period of
nasty exchanges, the two of us spoke on the telephone and aired our
differences. After that, there were no more hostilities. Unlike
McKelvy, both Stewart Pinkerton and Paul Wagner, two former posters
who, like Leslie Van Vreeland, made the mistake of engaging in personal
attacks thorugh lying about my credentials - had the integrity to issue
public retractions when they quickly found out that their statements
were both false and libelous because of evidence they obtained.
Another psychologist (industrial, I think) who used to post here, and
is, I believe an acquaintance of both Nousaine and Krueger, is a man by
the name of Doug Stabler. As I recall, he lives in Palatine, Illinois,
or did the last time I corresponded with him. He also knows the truth.
McKelvy should do no less than issue a public retraction re. his
comments about my identity, professional activities, and credentials.

Doofus, I agreed that if JJ said you were who you said you were that was
good enough for me. When is the last time I questioned whether or not you
were a shrink? The person who continually brings it up is YOU!

I stated some time ago that the problem was less about your profession, than
it was about the fact that choose to try and become a professional asshole.

My original proposal stands. Pick a time for me to call you, then using
caller I.D. which I assume you have, post the last 4 numbers of the phone I
call from. That's it. It does have to be the number listed as belonging to
Bruce J. Richman PhD. in N. Miami, Fl. You don't have to talk to me. In
fact I have no desire to talk to you.

If you like I will give the number I intend to call you from to a neutral
3rd party like Sander or Ruud, so they can back up the story and make you
more comfortable that I'm not cheating.

Michael McKelvy wrote:
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
oups.com...
When McKelvy claimed, after 7 years, that he would shut his lying,
libelous mouth and never mention my name again or respond to my
posts
if I agreed to his pathetic attempts to harass me via telephone and
give him some information, just about all of those with at least
half a
brain saw through his scam.

Incredible that you could see through a non-existent scam. A scam
that did
not involve any actual direct commumication, therefore no real
harrassment.
Apparently, half a brain is all you have.

You're an imbecile, duh-Mikey. Responding to a telephone number tha
you dial in any way *is* communication, you idiot. I know, even if
you're too obtuse to recognize the fact, that it requires
"communication" to even identify telephone numbers you might use in a
telephone call. And of couse, without other evidence, there is no way
of knowing that the call was made you, moron. Or that it came from
your cell-phone, dimwit. You really are quite naive to think that
anybody would not see through your scam. My prooposal, OTOH, is much
more concrete (although not foolproof) and likely to provide verifiable
information.



Obviously, there was (and is) no reason to
trust him, given his despicable history.

My history of asking pointed questions that you refuse to answer,
like why
you made an unprovoked personal attack in the Julian Hirsch thread?



Your history of lying about my identity, my professional background,
and my credentials. Your history of lying about attack threads and
many other things involving me. Your history of being disproven on
numerous occasions about your lies about unprovoked peronal attacks. At
the end of this post, juust to refresh your menory, I'll post one of my
prio responses to your "questions". On second thought, let me do it
now:


-----------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to proven libeler and pathological liar McKelvy's continued
repetition of false claims, coupled with a laughable "demand" that I
produce evidence that he has a lengthy history of lying and libeling me
on RAO, I decided to call this cretin's pathetic attempts to dodge
responsibility for his despicable behavior with the following response.

A couple of observations, should be added re. my post of April 9, 2004,
which is reproduced below:

1. In the first example of libel by McKelvy which I cite, he initiated
libel thread with the title "Richman's ethical lapses". It is worth
noting that he does not and CAN NOT list any. So obviously, his sole
purpose was to libel and defame another person. I chose to ignore this
piece of unprovoked garbage which he initiated. As did every other RAO
poster.

2. As of the time of this writing, 4:00 PM EST on 4/10/04, the proven
liar and libeler Mckelvy has failed to respond directly to the post
reproduced below. It is obvious that his latest bluff/bull**** has
been called and he's been exposed for what most on RAO already have
known him to be for a long time - a hatemongering, bitter, delusional
liar and character assassin whose primary purpose in posting on RAO is
to smear others with whatever lies, libelous false claims and libelous
labels of other people his diseased, delusional "mind" (such as it is
in its primitive state) can regurgitate.

3. Proven liar and libeler McKelvy has been challenged to submit his
delusional "complaints" about my professional and ethical behavior
(about which he has admitted he knows nothing - one of the few true
things he has ever said) to the appropriate licensing board in my
state. Of course, he has failed to do so, most likely because he knows
that he's full of it, and will be sued by me after he does so.

4. I could have provided many more examples of McKelvy's compulsive
lies and libels against me, but felt that for now, 2 would be
sufficient. Pending the results of Mr. Wheeler's case, and in
consultation with my attornies, I may elect to pursue legal action
against him and use a quite impressive and lengthy file of false,
libelous claims he has made against me as evidence. No doubt, he will
"help" by continuing to provide further evidence that can be used
against him.

5. I apologize for the lengfh of this post in advance, but in
consideration of McKelvy's obvious compulsive, pathological responses
which almost always consist of further lies and libelous false
statements about me, this response is IMHO, quite appropriate.

6. This response will be the one used in the future to deal with
McKelvy's subsequent sociopathic, delusional, false, and libelous
personal attacks against me.




Mike McKelvy continues to avoid providing proof of his slander:
From: (Bruce J. Richman)

Mike McKelvy wrote:


From: (Bruce J. Richman)


deletion of further lies in which McKelvy tries to avoid
responsibility for
lengthy history of lying and committing slander re. my credentials,
training
and professional activities.

This despicable scumbag, after first admitting he knows nothing about
my
credentials, training and professional activities, then laughingly
trying to
claim his slanderous bull**** was merely opinions, and now attempting
to
deny
all responsibility for his ridiculous lies ? insults the
intelligence of
all
RAO readers.

His requests for "proof" ? like all his imbecilic grunts and
mutterings
concerning me ? are a joke. As is his very RAO existence.

While he continue to deny slandering me, and requesting proof, his
credibility
remains zero (except perhaps, in the eyes of his hero, Krueger).

His false claims re. my professional background are a matter of
Google
record,
and virtually all RAO readers at all familiar with this sociopath's
imbecilic
bull**** re. my background know this to be the case.

Since he's been purveying lies about me, he needs to present the
proof for
all
his nonsense, or stick his head further up the orifice in which it's
obviously
been inserted for so long.




Bruce J. Richman



repetitive bull**** similar to that pruveyed over a 6 year period by
this
pathological liar and proven slanderer deleted

For this pathological liar, all false claims about another person's
training,
credentials, professional experience, etc. ? are only "opinions" ? a
piece of
bull**** nobody other than this lying cretin believes.

Here's just one example of his slander:


http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...thbp0ffk2j625%
40corp.supernews.com&rnum=7&prev=/groups%3Fq%3DMcKelvy%2Band%2Blicensing%2
Bboard%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF?8%26sa%3DN%26t ab%3Dwg

Note that this was an attack thread started by McKelvy, in which this
fool,
reproduces the Ethical Code followed by psychologists.

Note the slanderous title of the post.

Note also the question, this proven slanderer asks in the last line
after
quoting the Ethical code.

Needless to say, this pathological liar has no evidence that I have
ever
committed any ethics violations, and in fact his use of the title of
this
thread, to which nobody responded, constitutes slander.

I have directly challenged this despicable cretin and proven liar to
submit any

complaints he has to the Florida State Licensing Board. He has refused
to do
so, because he knows he's been lying about me for 6 years.

This fool, in a conversation with Scott Wheeler commiitted another
blatant lie:


"The person claiming to be B.J. Richman, a Ph.D is a fake as should be
obvious to anybody with more than 2 active neurons."

The reference for this is
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...igk0458h89%40c
orp.supernews.com

Now, no doubt, proven liar and slanderer McKelvy will claim he's just
voiced an
opinion, but defamation and libel of a licensed psychologist, whose
identity is

acknowledged and has been proven on RAO to the satisfaction of
virtually all
conscious lifeforms with the exception of McKelvy and Krueger, is *not*
an
opinion.

His lies are a matter of public record, and these 2 examples are just a
few of
many that could be easily obtained from the Google record.

He has also deliberately ignored the following evidence presented on
Google:

"The University of Texas at Austin, has long had one of the most highly
regarded
doctoral programs in Clinical Psychology in the United States (top 10
ranking). Since I had the good fortune to have a very good record in
my
Master's propgram at Clinical Psychology at Boston College,l and
perhaps
becauise I hit the 99th %ile on the Graduate Record Examination (Verbal
Portion) and the 99th %ile examination on the Psychology Acvhievement
section,
I had the rather odd experience of being actively recruited by schools
to which
I applied. (I had always thought this just happened to jocks, but I
was
wrong). One unforgettable day, I got a call from the head of the
Clinical
Psychology program at the University of Texas, a Dr. James Bieri, who
basically
said "We've seen your application, we'd like you to come here, and
we're
prepared to make you a nice offfer". That nice offer, which I
accepted, turned
out to be a NIMH (National Institutes of Mental Health) Traineeship in
Clinical
Psychology, for an unlimited period of time, with no strings attached
other
than that I meet the academic requirements of the program (maintain a B
average).. It took care of all my expenses (tuition, room & board,
books,
etc.) and gave me s small stipend to live on as well. Some of my
classmates
congratulated me on my good fortune (many of them had to accept
teaching
assistantships to help pay their bills, while all I had to do was hit
the
books). The program turned out to be a real meatgrinder (as one of my
classmates put it). It made my undergraduate program at an elite
"small Ivy
League school" (Bowdoin College) and my M.A. program seem like
kindergarten.
Almost everybody in my entering class of about 20 had either a Phi
Beta Kappa key, was published and or came from Ivy League schools or
places
like U. of Chicago, Stanford or Berkeley. Of the 20 who started the
program,
only 5 of us survived and got our doctorates. It took not only a high
degree
of intelligence and perserverance, but also a large ability to deal
with the
stress of knowing that you were in a program with a very high attrition
rate
and some professors, who frankly, until you got to the 2nd year and had
"paid
your dues", didn't give a damn if you survived or not. I'll never
forgot one
of my Statistics professors who used to get up in front of the class
and say
"Even if you don't make it through graduate school, you can still be a
good
citizen""

and the following:

"I was accepted for an Internship in Clnical
Psycnology at Massachusetts General Hospital, which I accepted and
completed"

and the followiong:

"After obtaining my doctorate, I was
also accepted for postdoctoral training at Temple Medical School,
Department of
Psychiary, Institute for Behavior Therapy, in Philadelphia. I enjoyed
my time
there had learned a lot under the supervision of the late Dr. Joseph
Wolpe, a
world famous psychiatrist who is considered to be one of the founders
of
Cognitive?Behavioral Therapy, the predominant type of therapy now
practiced by
most psychologists and psychiatrists (aside from pharmacotherapy). "

The above quotes are from a post written in response to Howard
Ferstler,
another well known zealot, pathological liar, and purveyor of libel on
RAO (not
surprisingly, frequently defended by Krueger, McKelvy's role model).

The complete post (and thread) can be referened at:

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...0203225629.076
19.00000418%40mb?mg.aol.com&prev=/groups%3Fq%3DFerstler%2Band%2BRichman%2B
and%2BUniversity%2Bof%2BTexas%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26 ie%3DUTF?8%26sa%3DN%26ta
b%3Dwg

So McKelvy's slandeous claims about quacks, frauds, and fakes are
nothing more
than the delusional, sociopathic rantings and repetitions of a proven
liar and
libeler.

No doubt he will claim that this is all made up, but the only thing
made up are
his nonsensical departures from reality which pollute RAO whenever he
continues
to libel me and others.

One further fact, which I may or may not be able to prove since it
happened a
long time ago, and I don't know if the radio station keeps records.
And I
challenge the cretin and liar, McKelvy, to disprove it ? LOL! :

In about 1976 or 1977, I was employed as the "Psychology Director" of a
private
Cardiac Rehabilitation Center based in Miami, Florida. The center ran
a
30?day, interdisciplinary inpatient program for patients who were
either at
high risk for cardiac disease or had already undergone such procedures
as
cardiac bypass surgery. My main responsibility was to direct the
behavioral
component of this intensive program (which also involved dieticians,
exercise
physiologists, cardiologists, and RNs). Areas such as stress
management,

smoking cessation, behavioral approaches to obesity, etc. were among
the
targets that I had to address. One of my other responsibilities was,
in
conjunction with the medical director, to promote the program through
various
media appearances in both TV and radio. Two interviews in particular
stand out
in my mind. The first came in the wee hours of the morning in New York
City on
a nationally syndicated program ? "The Long John Nebel Show" (New
Yorkers old
enough may remember this). The second occurred in my home base on the
79th
Street Causeway in Miami Beach at a radio station where Miami's best
known talk
show host (at the time) was carrying forth ? I spent 2 hours being
interviewed
very incisively on the main topic which was "Stress and Heart Disease".
I
remember coming away from that interview thinking that the interviewer
was very
sharp and well prepared to really grill me. The name of the radio
station (and
I'm relying on long ago recall was, I believe either WKAT or WIOD).
The name
of the host ? Larry King.

Shortly thereafter, Larry left Miami and the rest is history.

I challenge the proven liar, and libeler, McKelvy to dispute any of
these facts
with any factual evidence he cares to fabricate from the diseased empty
spaces
composing his deluded cranium.

No doubt he will choose to delete most of this post instead.

LOL!!!

(I apologize for appearing to be bragging about past or present
accomplishments, but since this despicable, loudmouthed, unbelievably
stupid,
delusional, libeler and liar decided to completely embarass himself
once again,
it was just too tempting to not assist him in making a fool of himself
and
exposing his sociopathic behavior once again).

Nothing more needs to be said about his lies, so when he responds with
more
bull****, I will respond with a standard, previously used, canned
response that
perfectly describes this moron's basic character, motivations, and
irrational
behaviors.

Bruce J. Richman, Ph.D.
Licensed Psychologist
(FL PY 2543)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's the kind of "history" you';r known for. I could have given many
othe examples of your libelous false stateements.






Had I allowed the calls from
him to go through and then given him the last 4 digits of his cell
phone, he could simply lie about this and claim either that (a) it
never happened, or (b) the numbers that I would then publish
(perhaps)
on RAO were ones that I made up.

I never said I would use my cell phone, that number is available
through
information and would have been too easy for you to claim that I
called you
from it, even if I hadn't.


Unlike you, I'm not in the habit of making false statements about
telephone calls to other people.



There is no question in my mind that
he has had and does not now have any intention of discontinuing his
smear campaigns and libel.

The only one on a smear campaign right now is you.


That's another obvious lie. Do the names, Lionel and Krueger ring a
bell? (Both of whom you support and imitate).



All that said, its' very tempting to expose this lying character
assassin as one who has no intention of honoring proposals that
involve
termination of his compulsive need to attack me whenever he can.

OSAF.

(That's just one of his wide range of psychiatric problems).
Therefore, I've decided to make a counterproposal that will be far
less
likely for him to cheat and sabotage. Just as there is a tape of
Krueger talking to Graham which many of us have heard and know to
be a
reality, despite Krueger's denials, my proposal also involves a
tape.

(1) I will designate a time for McKelvy to call the telephone
number
that he claims he has recently called several times.


I said 3 times.


Several = 3 as well as other numbers in common parlance.


(2) If he calls that number at the time I specify, he will get an
answering machine with my voice and name announced, with a request
that
he leave a message.

(3) He should then leave his name, telephone number, and mailing
address on the tape.

(4) I agree not to publish this information without his
permission.
However, I will announce that i have received the information and
post
it in a way that it can not be identified (omission of numerals and
letters).

(5) In return, McKelvy must publically stipulate on RAO - in the
title
of a thread - that he will refrain from ever mentioning me or my
professional activities again on RAO. (This is no more than he
promised to do in his proposal).

Actually, I said if you agreed to my proposal and could meet my
request, I
would shut up about you forever.


My counterproposal basically says the same thing. However, it requires
that you acknowledge this on RAO. If you plan on keeping your word,
you should have no problem iwth announcing it on RAO.


Further, he must agree and stipulate
that my attacks on Krueger or anybody else that attacks me DO NOT
GIVE
HIM ANY EXCUSE TO JUMP IN AND START FLAMING AWAY AS HE HAS DONE
OFTEN
IN THE PAST.

The reason for the tape recorded answering machine response
requirement
is quite simple. Just as a part of Krueger's conversation with
Graham
was posted to RAO (and a much larger, complete portion sent to many
of
us), if McKelvy denies or lies about making this call in the manner
specified, I'll have proof that he's lying. Given his history,
that's
a reasonable approach.
Of course, if he handles this correctly, no information will be
given
out other than that described above.


For those of you who remember Gene Steinberg, after a long period
of
nasty exchanges, the two of us spoke on the telephone and aired our
differences. After that, there were no more hostilities. Unlike
McKelvy, both Stewart Pinkerton and Paul Wagner, two former posters
who, like Leslie Van Vreeland, made the mistake of engaging in
personal
attacks thorugh lying about my credentials - had the integrity to
issue
public retractions when they quickly found out that their
statements
were both false and libelous because of evidence they obtained.
Another psychologist (industrial, I think) who used to post here,
and
is, I believe an acquaintance of both Nousaine and Krueger, is a
man by
the name of Doug Stabler. As I recall, he lives in Palatine,
Illinois,
or did the last time I corresponded with him. He also knows the
truth.
McKelvy should do no less than issue a public retraction re. his
comments about my identity, professional activities, and
credentials.

Doofus, I agreed that if JJ said you were who you said you were that
was
good enough for me. When is the last time I questioned whether or
not you
were a shrink? The person who continually brings it up is YOU!

I stated some time ago that the problem was less about your
profession, than
it was about the fact that choose to try and become a professional
asshole.



You're full of ****, asshole. You've made numerous comments about
"bean counters", "ethical lapses" and other idiotic false statements
that have absolutely nothing to do with whether or not I met with Jim
Johnston or anybody else. The fact that you even make a proposal now -
after 7 years of lying and libeling me - clearly indicates that you
still haven't gotten the message that you'be been discredited
concerning your bull**** about me. You persist in makinig phony
requests for "proof" that are clearly designed to be sabotaged and/or
otherwise ignored by you.

My original proposal stands. Pick a time for me to call you, then
using
caller I.D. which I assume you have, post the last 4 numbers of the
phone I
call from. That's it. It does have to be the number listed as
belonging to
Bruce J. Richman PhD. in N. Miami, Fl. You don't have to talk to me.
In
fact I have no desire to talk to you.

If you like I will give the number I intend to call you from to a
neutral
3rd party like Sander or Ruud, so they can back up the story and make
you
more comfortable that I'm not cheating.



My proposal stands. The number you called 3 times previously, listed
to Bruce J. Richman, Ph.D., will be answered by a telephone answering
machine with my voice and request for a message on it. There will be
no direct converstaion between us, since I have no desire to talk to
you and get into a time-wasting exchange of insults and accusations.
Call the number you have at a time and date I specify, leave the
required kinformation, and I shall publically acknowledgte that you
have done so, giving details from your message that correspond to what
you have said. As I have stated, no information will be posted that
actually reveals the number from which you call or the address you
provide -just masked versions of same.

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
ups.com...

Michael McKelvy wrote:
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
oups.com...
When McKelvy claimed, after 7 years, that he would shut his lying,
libelous mouth and never mention my name again or respond to my
posts
if I agreed to his pathetic attempts to harass me via telephone and
give him some information, just about all of those with at least
half a
brain saw through his scam.

Incredible that you could see through a non-existent scam. A scam
that did
not involve any actual direct commumication, therefore no real
harrassment.
Apparently, half a brain is all you have.

You're an imbecile, duh-Mikey. Responding to a telephone number tha
you dial in any way *is* communication, you idiot.

But it's not "direct" communication which is what I said.

I know, even if
you're too obtuse to recognize the fact, that it requires
"communication" to even identify telephone numbers you might use in a
telephone call. And of couse, without other evidence, there is no way
of knowing that the call was made you, moron.

It requires you to post the last 4 digits. in order to prove you were able
to recieve the call. It does not require direct communication.

If some 3rd party has the last 4 digits in order to confirm they are the
ones I used, you have independent verification.

Or that it came from
your cell-phone, dimwit.

I won't use my cell phone since that is available through information.

You really are quite naive to think that
anybody would not see through your scam.

There is no scam, so obviously, you invent one.

My prooposal, OTOH, is much
more concrete (although not foolproof) and likely to provide verifiable
information.

I don't trust you not to use my voice in some unauthorised way.

Obviously, there was (and is) no reason to
trust him, given his despicable history.

My history of asking pointed questions that you refuse to answer,
like why
you made an unprovoked personal attack in the Julian Hirsch thread?



Your history of lying about my identity, my professional background,
and my credentials.

Except that I haven't lied about them, I've expressed doubts about them.
IOW opinions.

Your history of lying about attack threads and
many other things involving me.

None of which you seem to be able to prove.

Your history of being disproven on
numerous occasions about your lies about unprovoked peronal attacks. At
the end of this post, juust to refresh your menory, I'll post one of my
prio responses to your "questions". On second thought, let me do it
now:


-----------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to proven libeler and pathological liar McKelvy's continued
repetition of false claims, coupled with a laughable "demand" that I
produce evidence that he has a lengthy history of lying and libeling me
on RAO, I decided to call this cretin's pathetic attempts to dodge
responsibility for his despicable behavior with the following response.

A couple of observations, should be added re. my post of April 9, 2004,
which is reproduced below:

1. In the first example of libel by McKelvy which I cite, he initiated
libel thread with the title "Richman's ethical lapses". It is worth
noting that he does not and CAN NOT list any. So obviously, his sole
purpose was to libel and defame another person.

OSAF

I chose to ignore this
piece of unprovoked garbage which he initiated. As did every other RAO
poster.

2. As of the time of this writing, 4:00 PM EST on 4/10/04, the proven
liar and libeler Mckelvy has failed to respond directly to the post
reproduced below. It is obvious that his latest bluff/bull**** has
been called and he's been exposed for what most on RAO already have
known him to be for a long time - a hatemongering, bitter, delusional
liar and character assassin whose primary purpose in posting on RAO is
to smear others with whatever lies, libelous false claims and libelous
labels of other people his diseased, delusional "mind" (such as it is
in its primitive state) can regurgitate.

3. Proven liar and libeler McKelvy has been challenged to submit his
delusional "complaints" about my professional and ethical behavior
(about which he has admitted he knows nothing - one of the few true
things he has ever said) to the appropriate licensing board in my
state. Of course, he has failed to do so, most likely because he knows
that he's full of it, and will be sued by me after he does so.

4. I could have provided many more examples of McKelvy's compulsive
lies and libels against me, but felt that for now, 2 would be
sufficient. Pending the results of Mr. Wheeler's case, and in
consultation with my attornies, I may elect to pursue legal action
against him and use a quite impressive and lengthy file of false,
libelous claims he has made against me as evidence. No doubt, he will
"help" by continuing to provide further evidence that can be used
against him.

5. I apologize for the lengfh of this post in advance, but in
consideration of McKelvy's obvious compulsive, pathological responses
which almost always consist of further lies and libelous false
statements about me, this response is IMHO, quite appropriate.

6. This response will be the one used in the future to deal with
McKelvy's subsequent sociopathic, delusional, false, and libelous
personal attacks against me.




Mike McKelvy continues to avoid providing proof of his slander:
From: (Bruce J. Richman)

Mike McKelvy wrote:


From: (Bruce J. Richman)


deletion of further lies in which McKelvy tries to avoid
responsibility for
lengthy history of lying and committing slander re. my credentials,
training
and professional activities.

This despicable scumbag, after first admitting he knows nothing about
my
credentials, training and professional activities, then laughingly
trying to
claim his slanderous bull**** was merely opinions, and now attempting
to
deny
all responsibility for his ridiculous lies ? insults the
intelligence of
all
RAO readers.

His requests for "proof" ? like all his imbecilic grunts and
mutterings
concerning me ? are a joke. As is his very RAO existence.

While he continue to deny slandering me, and requesting proof, his
credibility
remains zero (except perhaps, in the eyes of his hero, Krueger).

His false claims re. my professional background are a matter of
Google
record,
and virtually all RAO readers at all familiar with this sociopath's
imbecilic
bull**** re. my background know this to be the case.

Since he's been purveying lies about me, he needs to present the
proof for
all
his nonsense, or stick his head further up the orifice in which it's
obviously
been inserted for so long.




Bruce J. Richman



repetitive bull**** similar to that pruveyed over a 6 year period by
this
pathological liar and proven slanderer deleted

For this pathological liar, all false claims about another person's
training,
credentials, professional experience, etc. ? are only "opinions" ? a
piece of
bull**** nobody other than this lying cretin believes.

Here's just one example of his slander:


http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...thbp0ffk2j625%

This is the message I get when going to the above link.

Sorry, the document you requested is not available. You can visit the main
page.

40corp.supernews.com&rnum=7&prev=/groups%3Fq%3DMcKelvy%2Band%2Blicensing%2
Bboard%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF?8%26sa%3DN%26t ab%3Dwg

Note that this was an attack thread started by McKelvy, in which this
fool,
reproduces the Ethical Code followed by psychologists.

Note the slanderous title of the post.

Note also the question, this proven slanderer asks in the last line
after
quoting the Ethical code.

Needless to say, this pathological liar has no evidence that I have
ever
committed any ethics violations, and in fact his use of the title of
this
thread, to which nobody responded, constitutes slander.

I have directly challenged this despicable cretin and proven liar to
submit any

complaints he has to the Florida State Licensing Board. He has refused
to do
so, because he knows he's been lying about me for 6 years.

This fool, in a conversation with Scott Wheeler commiitted another
blatant lie:


"The person claiming to be B.J. Richman, a Ph.D is a fake as should be
obvious to anybody with more than 2 active neurons."

The reference for this is
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...igk0458h89%40c
orp.supernews.com


And here's what I got for the above.

Sorry, the document you requested is not available. You can visit the main
page.

Now, no doubt, proven liar and slanderer McKelvy will claim he's just
voiced an
opinion, but defamation and libel of a licensed psychologist, whose
identity is

acknowledged and has been proven on RAO to the satisfaction of
virtually all
conscious lifeforms with the exception of McKelvy and Krueger, is *not*
an
opinion.

His lies are a matter of public record, and these 2 examples are just a
few of
many that could be easily obtained from the Google record.

He has also deliberately ignored the following evidence presented on
Google:

"The University of Texas at Austin, has long had one of the most highly
regarded
doctoral programs in Clinical Psychology in the United States (top 10
ranking). Since I had the good fortune to have a very good record in
my
Master's propgram at Clinical Psychology at Boston College,l and
perhaps
becauise I hit the 99th %ile on the Graduate Record Examination (Verbal
Portion) and the 99th %ile examination on the Psychology Acvhievement
section,
I had the rather odd experience of being actively recruited by schools
to which
I applied. (I had always thought this just happened to jocks, but I
was
wrong). One unforgettable day, I got a call from the head of the
Clinical
Psychology program at the University of Texas, a Dr. James Bieri, who
basically
said "We've seen your application, we'd like you to come here, and
we're
prepared to make you a nice offfer". That nice offer, which I
accepted, turned
out to be a NIMH (National Institutes of Mental Health) Traineeship in
Clinical
Psychology, for an unlimited period of time, with no strings attached
other
than that I meet the academic requirements of the program (maintain a B
average).. It took care of all my expenses (tuition, room & board,
books,
etc.) and gave me s small stipend to live on as well. Some of my
classmates
congratulated me on my good fortune (many of them had to accept
teaching
assistantships to help pay their bills, while all I had to do was hit
the
books). The program turned out to be a real meatgrinder (as one of my
classmates put it). It made my undergraduate program at an elite
"small Ivy
League school" (Bowdoin College) and my M.A. program seem like
kindergarten.
Almost everybody in my entering class of about 20 had either a Phi
Beta Kappa key, was published and or came from Ivy League schools or
places
like U. of Chicago, Stanford or Berkeley. Of the 20 who started the
program,
only 5 of us survived and got our doctorates. It took not only a high
degree
of intelligence and perserverance, but also a large ability to deal
with the
stress of knowing that you were in a program with a very high attrition
rate
and some professors, who frankly, until you got to the 2nd year and had
"paid
your dues", didn't give a damn if you survived or not. I'll never
forgot one
of my Statistics professors who used to get up in front of the class
and say
"Even if you don't make it through graduate school, you can still be a
good
citizen""

and the following:

"I was accepted for an Internship in Clnical
Psycnology at Massachusetts General Hospital, which I accepted and
completed"

and the followiong:

"After obtaining my doctorate, I was
also accepted for postdoctoral training at Temple Medical School,
Department of
Psychiary, Institute for Behavior Therapy, in Philadelphia. I enjoyed
my time
there had learned a lot under the supervision of the late Dr. Joseph
Wolpe, a
world famous psychiatrist who is considered to be one of the founders
of
Cognitive?Behavioral Therapy, the predominant type of therapy now
practiced by
most psychologists and psychiatrists (aside from pharmacotherapy). "

The above quotes are from a post written in response to Howard
Ferstler,
another well known zealot, pathological liar, and purveyor of libel on
RAO (not
surprisingly, frequently defended by Krueger, McKelvy's role model).

The complete post (and thread) can be referened at:

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...0203225629.076
19.00000418%40mb?mg.aol.com&prev=/groups%3Fq%3DFerstler%2Band%2BRichman%2B
and%2BUniversity%2Bof%2BTexas%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26 ie%3DUTF?8%26sa%3DN%26ta
b%3Dwg

So McKelvy's slandeous claims about quacks, frauds, and fakes are
nothing more
than the delusional, sociopathic rantings and repetitions of a proven
liar and
libeler.

No doubt he will claim that this is all made up, but the only thing
made up are
his nonsensical departures from reality which pollute RAO whenever he
continues
to libel me and others.

One further fact, which I may or may not be able to prove since it
happened a
long time ago, and I don't know if the radio station keeps records.
And I
challenge the cretin and liar, McKelvy, to disprove it ? LOL! :

In about 1976 or 1977, I was employed as the "Psychology Director" of a
private
Cardiac Rehabilitation Center based in Miami, Florida. The center ran
a
30?day, interdisciplinary inpatient program for patients who were
either at
high risk for cardiac disease or had already undergone such procedures
as
cardiac bypass surgery. My main responsibility was to direct the
behavioral
component of this intensive program (which also involved dieticians,
exercise
physiologists, cardiologists, and RNs). Areas such as stress
management,

smoking cessation, behavioral approaches to obesity, etc. were among
the
targets that I had to address. One of my other responsibilities was,
in
conjunction with the medical director, to promote the program through
various
media appearances in both TV and radio. Two interviews in particular
stand out
in my mind. The first came in the wee hours of the morning in New York
City on
a nationally syndicated program ? "The Long John Nebel Show" (New
Yorkers old
enough may remember this). The second occurred in my home base on the
79th
Street Causeway in Miami Beach at a radio station where Miami's best
known talk
show host (at the time) was carrying forth ? I spent 2 hours being
interviewed
very incisively on the main topic which was "Stress and Heart Disease".
I
remember coming away from that interview thinking that the interviewer
was very
sharp and well prepared to really grill me. The name of the radio
station (and
I'm relying on long ago recall was, I believe either WKAT or WIOD).
The name
of the host ? Larry King.

Shortly thereafter, Larry left Miami and the rest is history.

I challenge the proven liar, and libeler, McKelvy to dispute any of
these facts
with any factual evidence he cares to fabricate from the diseased empty
spaces
composing his deluded cranium.

No doubt he will choose to delete most of this post instead.

LOL!!!

(I apologize for appearing to be bragging about past or present
accomplishments, but since this despicable, loudmouthed, unbelievably
stupid,
delusional, libeler and liar decided to completely embarass himself
once again,
it was just too tempting to not assist him in making a fool of himself
and
exposing his sociopathic behavior once again).

Nothing more needs to be said about his lies, so when he responds with
more
bull****, I will respond with a standard, previously used, canned
response that
perfectly describes this moron's basic character, motivations, and
irrational
behaviors.

Bruce J. Richman, Ph.D.
Licensed Psychologist
(FL PY 2543)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's the kind of "history" you';r known for. I could have given many
othe examples of your libelous false stateements.






Had I allowed the calls from
him to go through and then given him the last 4 digits of his cell
phone, he could simply lie about this and claim either that (a) it
never happened, or (b) the numbers that I would then publish
(perhaps)
on RAO were ones that I made up.

I never said I would use my cell phone, that number is available
through
information and would have been too easy for you to claim that I
called you
from it, even if I hadn't.


Unlike you, I'm not in the habit of making false statements about
telephone calls to other people.

What false statements would those be?

There is no question in my mind that
he has had and does not now have any intention of discontinuing his
smear campaigns and libel.

The only one on a smear campaign right now is you.


That's another obvious lie. Do the names, Lionel and Krueger ring a
bell? (Both of whom you support and imitate).

A breif glance at history shows that Lionel and I have had a few dustups and
that ratonal people would not conclude that we are on friendly terms.

All that said, its' very tempting to expose this lying character
assassin as one who has no intention of honoring proposals that
involve
termination of his compulsive need to attack me whenever he can.

OSAF.

(That's just one of his wide range of psychiatric problems).
Therefore, I've decided to make a counterproposal that will be far
less
likely for him to cheat and sabotage. Just as there is a tape of
Krueger talking to Graham which many of us have heard and know to
be a
reality, despite Krueger's denials, my proposal also involves a
tape.

(1) I will designate a time for McKelvy to call the telephone
number
that he claims he has recently called several times.


I said 3 times.


Several = 3 as well as other numbers in common parlance.


(2) If he calls that number at the time I specify, he will get an
answering machine with my voice and name announced, with a request
that
he leave a message.


I'd rather call at a time of my choosing, one that would be during normal
business hours. Not one where you could pre-arrange with someone.


(3) He should then leave his name, telephone number, and mailing
address on the tape.


You can get all that from information.

(4) I agree not to publish this information without his
permission.
However, I will announce that i have received the information and
post
it in a way that it can not be identified (omission of numerals and
letters).

(5) In return, McKelvy must publically stipulate on RAO - in the
title
of a thread - that he will refrain from ever mentioning me or my
professional activities again on RAO.

I already stopped referencing your professional activities until you started
bringing it up again, twit.

(This is no more than he
promised to do in his proposal).

Actually, I said if you agreed to my proposal and could meet my
request, I
would shut up about you forever.


My counterproposal basically says the same thing. However, it requires
that you acknowledge this on RAO. If you plan on keeping your word,
you should have no problem iwth announcing it on RAO.

Since it's aprt of my original proposal, what's the point?

Further, he must agree and stipulate
that my attacks on Krueger or anybody else that attacks me DO NOT
GIVE
HIM ANY EXCUSE TO JUMP IN AND START FLAMING AWAY AS HE HAS DONE
OFTEN
IN THE PAST.

Tell me why you flamed him in the Julian Hirsch thread.

The reason for the tape recorded answering machine response
requirement
is quite simple. Just as a part of Krueger's conversation with
Graham
was posted to RAO (and a much larger, complete portion sent to many
of
us), if McKelvy denies or lies about making this call in the manner
specified, I'll have proof that he's lying. Given his history,
that's
a reasonable approach.

What's unreasonable about posting the last 4 digits of a number I call you
from, that a 3rd party will know in advance?

Of course, if he handles this correctly, no information will be
given
out other than that described above.


For those of you who remember Gene Steinberg, after a long period
of
nasty exchanges, the two of us spoke on the telephone and aired our
differences. After that, there were no more hostilities. Unlike
McKelvy, both Stewart Pinkerton and Paul Wagner, two former posters
who, like Leslie Van Vreeland, made the mistake of engaging in
personal
attacks thorugh lying about my credentials - had the integrity to
issue
public retractions when they quickly found out that their
statements
were both false and libelous because of evidence they obtained.
Another psychologist (industrial, I think) who used to post here,
and
is, I believe an acquaintance of both Nousaine and Krueger, is a
man by
the name of Doug Stabler. As I recall, he lives in Palatine,
Illinois,
or did the last time I corresponded with him. He also knows the
truth.
McKelvy should do no less than issue a public retraction re. his
comments about my identity, professional activities, and
credentials.

Doofus, I agreed that if JJ said you were who you said you were that
was
good enough for me. When is the last time I questioned whether or
not you
were a shrink? The person who continually brings it up is YOU!

I stated some time ago that the problem was less about your
profession, than
it was about the fact that choose to try and become a professional
asshole.



You're full of ****, asshole. You've made numerous comments about
"bean counters", "ethical lapses" and other idiotic false statements
that have absolutely nothing to do with whether or not I met with Jim
Johnston or anybody else.

Those were the things I was told about you by Gindi. You can believe it or
not, I don't care.

The fact that you even make a proposal now -
after 7 years of lying and libeling me - clearly indicates that you
still haven't gotten the message that you'be been discredited
concerning your bull**** about me. You persist in makinig phony
requests for "proof" that are clearly designed to be sabotaged and/or
otherwise ignored by you.

No, it shows that you still continue to act like an asshole and you still
make **** up, and scream about imagined wrongs.


My original proposal stands. Pick a time for me to call you, then
using
caller I.D. which I assume you have, post the last 4 numbers of the
phone I
call from. That's it. It does have to be the number listed as
belonging to
Bruce J. Richman PhD. in N. Miami, Fl. You don't have to talk to me.
In
fact I have no desire to talk to you.

If you like I will give the number I intend to call you from to a
neutral
3rd party like Sander or Ruud, so they can back up the story and make
you
more comfortable that I'm not cheating.

Michael McKelvy wrote:
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
ups.com...

Michael McKelvy wrote:
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
oups.com...
When McKelvy claimed, after 7 years, that he would shut his
lying,
libelous mouth and never mention my name again or respond to my
posts
if I agreed to his pathetic attempts to harass me via telephone
and
give him some information, just about all of those with at least
half a
brain saw through his scam.

Incredible that you could see through a non-existent scam. A scam
that did
not involve any actual direct commumication, therefore no real
harrassment.
Apparently, half a brain is all you have.

You're an imbecile, duh-Mikey. Responding to a telephone number
tha
you dial in any way *is* communication, you idiot.

But it's not "direct" communication which is what I said.

I know, even if
you're too obtuse to recognize the fact, that it requires
"communication" to even identify telephone numbers you might use in
a
telephone call. And of couse, without other evidence, there is no
way
of knowing that the call was made you, moron.

It requires you to post the last 4 digits. in order to prove you were
able
to recieve the call. It does not require direct communication.

If some 3rd party has the last 4 digits in order to confirm they are
the
ones I used, you have independent verification.



Wrong. You could very easily lie about this as you have about other
things. You could give a 3rd party one set of numbers and then call
from another.



r that it came from
your cell-phone, dimwit.

I won't use my cell phone since that is available through
information.

You really are quite naive to think that
anybody would not see through your scam.

There is no scam, so obviously, you invent one.


Another false statement. See above.


My prooposal, OTOH, is much
more concrete (although not foolproof) and likely to provide
verifiable
information.

I don't trust you not to use my voice in some unauthorised way.


If I did, you could claim I lied about promising not to do so here on
RAO. Besides, you don't have to say anything other than your name and
a few other pieces of information that prove you are who you say you
are.



Obviously, there was (and is) no reason to
trust him, given his despicable history.

My history of asking pointed questions that you refuse to answer,
like why
you made an unprovoked personal attack in the Julian Hirsch
thread?



Your history of lying about my identity, my professional
background,
and my credentials.

Except that I haven't lied about them, I've expressed doubts about
them.
IOW opinions.


False statrements such as the ones above are not opinions, since there
is evidence proving them to be false. They are lies.



Your history of lying about attack threads and
many other things involving me.

None of which you seem to be able to prove.


Another lie. i've posted a stock answer several times providing
evidence of just one of your many attack threads.


Your history of being disproven on
numerous occasions about your lies about unprovoked peronal
attacks. At
the end of this post, juust to refresh your menory, I'll post one
of my
prio responses to your "questions". On second thought, let me do
it
now:



-----------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to proven libeler and pathological liar McKelvy's
continued
repetition of false claims, coupled with a laughable "demand" that
I
produce evidence that he has a lengthy history of lying and
libeling me
on RAO, I decided to call this cretin's pathetic attempts to dodge
responsibility for his despicable behavior with the following
response.

A couple of observations, should be added re. my post of April 9,
2004,
which is reproduced below:

1. In the first example of libel by McKelvy which I cite, he
initiated
libel thread with the title "Richman's ethical lapses". It is
worth
noting that he does not and CAN NOT list any. So obviously, his
sole
purpose was to libel and defame another person.

OSAF

I chose to ignore this
piece of unprovoked garbage which he initiated. As did every other
RAO
poster.

2. As of the time of this writing, 4:00 PM EST on 4/10/04, the
proven
liar and libeler Mckelvy has failed to respond directly to the post
reproduced below. It is obvious that his latest bluff/bull**** has
been called and he's been exposed for what most on RAO already have
known him to be for a long time - a hatemongering, bitter,
delusional
liar and character assassin whose primary purpose in posting on RAO
is
to smear others with whatever lies, libelous false claims and
libelous
labels of other people his diseased, delusional "mind" (such as it
is
in its primitive state) can regurgitate.

3. Proven liar and libeler McKelvy has been challenged to submit
his
delusional "complaints" about my professional and ethical behavior
(about which he has admitted he knows nothing - one of the few true
things he has ever said) to the appropriate licensing board in my
state. Of course, he has failed to do so, most likely because he
knows
that he's full of it, and will be sued by me after he does so.

4. I could have provided many more examples of McKelvy's compulsive
lies and libels against me, but felt that for now, 2 would be
sufficient. Pending the results of Mr. Wheeler's case, and in
consultation with my attornies, I may elect to pursue legal action
against him and use a quite impressive and lengthy file of false,
libelous claims he has made against me as evidence. No doubt, he
will
"help" by continuing to provide further evidence that can be used
against him.

5. I apologize for the lengfh of this post in advance, but in
consideration of McKelvy's obvious compulsive, pathological
responses
which almost always consist of further lies and libelous false
statements about me, this response is IMHO, quite appropriate.

6. This response will be the one used in the future to deal with
McKelvy's subsequent sociopathic, delusional, false, and libelous
personal attacks against me.




Mike McKelvy continues to avoid providing proof of his slander:
From: (Bruce J. Richman)

Mike McKelvy wrote:


From: (Bruce J. Richman)


deletion of further lies in which McKelvy tries to avoid
responsibility for
lengthy history of lying and committing slander re. my
credentials,
training
and professional activities.

This despicable scumbag, after first admitting he knows nothing
about
my
credentials, training and professional activities, then laughingly
trying to
claim his slanderous bull**** was merely opinions, and now
attempting
to
deny
all responsibility for his ridiculous lies ? insults the
intelligence of
all
RAO readers.

His requests for "proof" ? like all his imbecilic grunts and
mutterings
concerning me ? are a joke. As is his very RAO existence.

While he continue to deny slandering me, and requesting proof, his
credibility
remains zero (except perhaps, in the eyes of his hero, Krueger).

His false claims re. my professional background are a matter of
Google
record,
and virtually all RAO readers at all familiar with this
sociopath's
imbecilic
bull**** re. my background know this to be the case.

Since he's been purveying lies about me, he needs to present the
proof for
all
his nonsense, or stick his head further up the orifice in which
it's
obviously
been inserted for so long.




Bruce J. Richman



repetitive bull**** similar to that pruveyed over a 6 year period
by
this
pathological liar and proven slanderer deleted

For this pathological liar, all false claims about another person's
training,
credentials, professional experience, etc. ? are only "opinions" ?
a
piece of
bull**** nobody other than this lying cretin believes.

Here's just one example of his slander:



http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...thbp0ffk2j625%

This is the message I get when going to the above link.

Sorry, the document you requested is not available. You can visit
the main
page.


40corp.supernews.com&rnum=7&prev=/groups%3Fq%3DMcKelvy%2Band%2Blicensing%2
Bboard%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF?8%26sa%3DN%26t ab%3Dwg

Note that this was an attack thread started by McKelvy, in which
this
fool,
reproduces the Ethical Code followed by psychologists.

Note the slanderous title of the post.

Note also the question, this proven slanderer asks in the last line
after
quoting the Ethical code.

Needless to say, this pathological liar has no evidence that I have
ever
committed any ethics violations, and in fact his use of the title
of
this
thread, to which nobody responded, constitutes slander.

I have directly challenged this despicable cretin and proven liar
to
submit any

complaints he has to the Florida State Licensing Board. He has
refused
to do
so, because he knows he's been lying about me for 6 years.

This fool, in a conversation with Scott Wheeler commiitted another
blatant lie:


"The person claiming to be B.J. Richman, a Ph.D is a fake as should
be
obvious to anybody with more than 2 active neurons."

The reference for this is

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...igk0458h89%40c
orp.supernews.com


And here's what I got for the above.

Sorry, the document you requested is not available. You can visit
the main
page.

Now, no doubt, proven liar and slanderer McKelvy will claim he's
just
voiced an
opinion, but defamation and libel of a licensed psychologist, whose
identity is

acknowledged and has been proven on RAO to the satisfaction of
virtually all
conscious lifeforms with the exception of McKelvy and Krueger, is
*not*
an
opinion.

His lies are a matter of public record, and these 2 examples are
just a
few of
many that could be easily obtained from the Google record.

He has also deliberately ignored the following evidence presented
on
Google:

"The University of Texas at Austin, has long had one of the most
highly
regarded
doctoral programs in Clinical Psychology in the United States (top
10
ranking). Since I had the good fortune to have a very good record
in
my
Master's propgram at Clinical Psychology at Boston College,l and
perhaps
becauise I hit the 99th %ile on the Graduate Record Examination
(Verbal
Portion) and the 99th %ile examination on the Psychology
Acvhievement
section,
I had the rather odd experience of being actively recruited by
schools
to which
I applied. (I had always thought this just happened to jocks, but
I
was
wrong). One unforgettable day, I got a call from the head of the
Clinical
Psychology program at the University of Texas, a Dr. James Bieri,
who
basically
said "We've seen your application, we'd like you to come here, and
we're
prepared to make you a nice offfer". That nice offer, which I
accepted, turned
out to be a NIMH (National Institutes of Mental Health) Traineeship
in
Clinical
Psychology, for an unlimited period of time, with no strings
attached
other
than that I meet the academic requirements of the program (maintain
a B
average).. It took care of all my expenses (tuition, room & board,
books,
etc.) and gave me s small stipend to live on as well. Some of my
classmates
congratulated me on my good fortune (many of them had to accept
teaching
assistantships to help pay their bills, while all I had to do was
hit
the
books). The program turned out to be a real meatgrinder (as one of
my
classmates put it). It made my undergraduate program at an elite
"small Ivy
League school" (Bowdoin College) and my M.A. program seem like
kindergarten.
Almost everybody in my entering class of about 20 had either a Phi
Beta Kappa key, was published and or came from Ivy League schools
or
places
like U. of Chicago, Stanford or Berkeley. Of the 20 who started
the
program,
only 5 of us survived and got our doctorates. It took not only a
high
degree
of intelligence and perserverance, but also a large ability to deal
with the
stress of knowing that you were in a program with a very high
attrition
rate
and some professors, who frankly, until you got to the 2nd year and
had
"paid
your dues", didn't give a damn if you survived or not. I'll never
forgot one
of my Statistics professors who used to get up in front of the
class
and say
"Even if you don't make it through graduate school, you can still
be a
good
citizen""

and the following:

"I was accepted for an Internship in Clnical
Psycnology at Massachusetts General Hospital, which I accepted and
completed"

and the followiong:

"After obtaining my doctorate, I was
also accepted for postdoctoral training at Temple Medical School,
Department of
Psychiary, Institute for Behavior Therapy, in Philadelphia. I
enjoyed
my time
there had learned a lot under the supervision of the late Dr.
Joseph
Wolpe, a
world famous psychiatrist who is considered to be one of the
founders
of
Cognitive?Behavioral Therapy, the predominant type of therapy now
practiced by
most psychologists and psychiatrists (aside from pharmacotherapy).
"

The above quotes are from a post written in response to Howard
Ferstler,
another well known zealot, pathological liar, and purveyor of libel
on
RAO (not
surprisingly, frequently defended by Krueger, McKelvy's role
model).

The complete post (and thread) can be referened at:


http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...0203225629.076

19.00000418%40mb?mg.aol.com&prev=/groups%3Fq%3DFerstler%2Band%2BRichman%2B

and%2BUniversity%2Bof%2BTexas%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26 ie%3DUTF?8%26sa%3DN%26ta
b%3Dwg

So McKelvy's slandeous claims about quacks, frauds, and fakes are
nothing more
than the delusional, sociopathic rantings and repetitions of a
proven
liar and
libeler.

No doubt he will claim that this is all made up, but the only thing
made up are
his nonsensical departures from reality which pollute RAO whenever
he
continues
to libel me and others.

One further fact, which I may or may not be able to prove since it
happened a
long time ago, and I don't know if the radio station keeps records.
And I
challenge the cretin and liar, McKelvy, to disprove it ? LOL! :

In about 1976 or 1977, I was employed as the "Psychology Director"
of a
private
Cardiac Rehabilitation Center based in Miami, Florida. The center
ran
a
30?day, interdisciplinary inpatient program for patients who were
either at
high risk for cardiac disease or had already undergone such
procedures
as
cardiac bypass surgery. My main responsibility was to direct the
behavioral
component of this intensive program (which also involved
dieticians,
exercise
physiologists, cardiologists, and RNs). Areas such as stress
management,

smoking cessation, behavioral approaches to obesity, etc. were
among
the
targets that I had to address. One of my other responsibilities
was,
in
conjunction with the medical director, to promote the program
through
various
media appearances in both TV and radio. Two interviews in
particular
stand out
in my mind. The first came in the wee hours of the morning in New
York
City on
a nationally syndicated program ? "The Long John Nebel Show" (New
Yorkers old
enough may remember this). The second occurred in my home base on
the
79th
Street Causeway in Miami Beach at a radio station where Miami's
best
known talk
show host (at the time) was carrying forth ? I spent 2 hours being
interviewed
very incisively on the main topic which was "Stress and Heart
Disease".
I
remember coming away from that interview thinking that the
interviewer
was very
sharp and well prepared to really grill me. The name of the radio
station (and
I'm relying on long ago recall was, I believe either WKAT or WIOD).
The name
of the host ? Larry King.

Shortly thereafter, Larry left Miami and the rest is history.

I challenge the proven liar, and libeler, McKelvy to dispute any of
these facts
with any factual evidence he cares to fabricate from the diseased
empty
spaces
composing his deluded cranium.

No doubt he will choose to delete most of this post instead.

LOL!!!

(I apologize for appearing to be bragging about past or present
accomplishments, but since this despicable, loudmouthed,
unbelievably
stupid,
delusional, libeler and liar decided to completely embarass himself
once again,
it was just too tempting to not assist him in making a fool of
himself
and
exposing his sociopathic behavior once again).

Nothing more needs to be said about his lies, so when he responds
with
more
bull****, I will respond with a standard, previously used, canned
response that
perfectly describes this moron's basic character, motivations, and
irrational
behaviors.

Bruce J. Richman, Ph.D.
Licensed Psychologist
(FL PY 2543)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's the kind of "history" you';r known for. I could have given
many
othe examples of your libelous false stateements.






Had I allowed the calls from
him to go through and then given him the last 4 digits of his
cell
phone, he could simply lie about this and claim either that (a)
it
never happened, or (b) the numbers that I would then publish
(perhaps)
on RAO were ones that I made up.

I never said I would use my cell phone, that number is available
through
information and would have been too easy for you to claim that I
called you
from it, even if I hadn't.


Unlike you, I'm not in the habit of making false statements about
telephone calls to other people.

What false statements would those be?


There is no question in my mind that
he has had and does not now have any intention of discontinuing
his
smear campaigns and libel.

The only one on a smear campaign right now is you.


That's another obvious lie. Do the names, Lionel and Krueger ring
a
bell? (Both of whom you support and imitate).

A breif glance at history shows that Lionel and I have had a few
dustups and
that ratonal people would not conclude that we are on friendly terms.

Rational people would conclude that the two of you share a strong
interest and character assassination and lying about others. Lionel,
being a fervent Hamas supporter adn antiSemite, also appears to
subscribe to the old Arabic principle "the enemy of my enemy is my
friend"./


All that said, its' very tempting to expose this lying character
assassin as one who has no intention of honoring proposals that
involve
termination of his compulsive need to attack me whenever he
can.

OSAF.

(That's just one of his wide range of psychiatric problems).
Therefore, I've decided to make a counterproposal that will be
far
less
likely for him to cheat and sabotage. Just as there is a tape
of
Krueger talking to Graham which many of us have heard and know
to
be a
reality, despite Krueger's denials, my proposal also involves a
tape.

(1) I will designate a time for McKelvy to call the telephone
number
that he claims he has recently called several times.


I said 3 times.


Several = 3 as well as other numbers in common parlance.


(2) If he calls that number at the time I specify, he will get
an
answering machine with my voice and name announced, with a
request
that
he leave a message.


I'd rather call at a time of my choosing, one that would be during
normal
business hours. Not one where you could pre-arrange with someone.


That would be your paranoid ideation working ovewrtime again. The time
UI specify will be during normal business hours, but during the normal
business hours of an East Coast psychologist.



(3) He should then leave his name, telephone number, and mailing
address on the tape.


You can get all that from information.

All I *might* get would be a listing for a person with the name,
Michael McKelvy. That would not prove in any way that you are that
person. Only a telephone call with verifiable information will do
that.



(4) I agree not to publish this information without his
permission.
However, I will announce that i have received the information
and
post
it in a way that it can not be identified (omission of numerals
and
letters).

(5) In return, McKelvy must publically stipulate on RAO - in the
title
of a thread - that he will refrain from ever mentioning me or my
professional activities again on RAO.

I already stopped referencing your professional activities until you
started
bringing it up again, twit.


Bull****, liar. Your propoisal and numerous other statements you have
made are designed to keep your smear campaign going on ad infinitum.


(This is no more than he
promised to do in his proposal).

Actually, I said if you agreed to my proposal and could meet my
request, I
would shut up about you forever.


My counterproposal basically says the same thing. However, it
requires
that you acknowledge this on RAO. If you plan on keeping your
word,
you should have no problem iwth announcing it on RAO.

Since it's aprt of my original proposal, what's the point?



What's the objection?


Further, he must agree and stipulate
that my attacks on Krueger or anybody else that attacks me DO
NOT
GIVE
HIM ANY EXCUSE TO JUMP IN AND START FLAMING AWAY AS HE HAS DONE
OFTEN
IN THE PAST.

Tell me why you flamed him in the Julian Hirsch thread.



Irrelevant. Why have you attacked me on numeous occasions when I've
retaliated against Krueger's smears. Why do you think that attacks
against Krueger in response to his insuls require you to get involved?
Have you ever heard the phrase "mind your own business"?




The reason for the tape recorded answering machine response
requirement
is quite simple. Just as a part of Krueger's conversation with
Graham
was posted to RAO (and a much larger, complete portion sent to
many
of
us), if McKelvy denies or lies about making this call in the
manner
specified, I'll have proof that he's lying. Given his history,
that's
a reasonable approach.

What's unreasonable about posting the last 4 digits of a number I
call you
from, that a 3rd party will know in advance?


See above.


Of course, if he handles this correctly, no information will be
given
out other than that described above.


For those of you who remember Gene Steinberg, after a long
period
of
nasty exchanges, the two of us spoke on the telephone and aired
our
differences. After that, there were no more hostilities.
Unlike
McKelvy, both Stewart Pinkerton and Paul Wagner, two former
posters
who, like Leslie Van Vreeland, made the mistake of engaging in
personal
attacks thorugh lying about my credentials - had the integrity
to
issue
public retractions when they quickly found out that their
statements
were both false and libelous because of evidence they obtained.
Another psychologist (industrial, I think) who used to post
here,
and
is, I believe an acquaintance of both Nousaine and Krueger, is a
man by
the name of Doug Stabler. As I recall, he lives in Palatine,
Illinois,
or did the last time I corresponded with him. He also knows the
truth.
McKelvy should do no less than issue a public retraction re. his
comments about my identity, professional activities, and
credentials.

Doofus, I agreed that if JJ said you were who you said you were
that
was
good enough for me. When is the last time I questioned whether or
not you
were a shrink? The person who continually brings it up is YOU!

I stated some time ago that the problem was less about your
profession, than
it was about the fact that choose to try and become a professional
asshole.



You're full of ****, asshole. You've made numerous comments about
"bean counters", "ethical lapses" and other idiotic false
statements
that have absolutely nothing to do with whether or not I met with
Jim
Johnston or anybody else.

Those were the things I was told about you by Gindi. You can believe
it or
not, I don't care.


You're lying again. No psychologist would claim I've made any ethical
lapses, since I haven't, and that is clear to all knowledgable people.
The fact that your attack thread with that title got no responses
speaks for itself. You failed to verify libelous information, yet
passed it on, claiming you "had it on good authority". That was a lie.
The information was untrue and the person you claim told it to you waw
not a "good authority", since he knows nothing about me other than the
fact that I'm a lice4nsed psychologist. (And that is a matter of
public record). In fact, he's never met me. So you, as always,
anxious to sling more libelous mud, just passed on a bunch of bogus
bull****.



The fact that you even make a proposal now -
after 7 years of lying and libeling me - clearly indicates that you
still haven't gotten the message that you'be been discredited
concerning your bull**** about me. You persist in makinig phony
requests for "proof" that are clearly designed to be sabotaged
and/or
otherwise ignored by you.

No, it shows that you still continue to act like an asshole and you
still
make **** up, and scream about imagined wrongs.



Your proposal was your invention and indicates that you're a delusional
asshole that continues to believe the bull**** you spew on a regular
basis. Your proposal was soundly ridiculed as the bugus attempt most
of us know it to be - just another cheap attempt to get ammjunitition
for another smear dampaign.




My original proposal stands. Pick a time for me to call you, then
using
caller I.D. which I assume you have, post the last 4 numbers of
the
phone I
call from. That's it. It does have to be the number listed as
belonging to
Bruce J. Richman PhD. in N. Miami, Fl. You don't have to talk to
me.
In
fact I have no desire to talk to you.

If you like I will give the number I intend to call you from to a
neutral
3rd party like Sander or Ruud, so they can back up the story and
make
you
more comfortable that I'm not cheating.




My proposal stands as written. The time for the call, during normal
business hours, can be arranged.

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
ups.com...

Michael McKelvy wrote:
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
ups.com...

Michael McKelvy wrote:
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
oups.com...
When McKelvy claimed, after 7 years, that he would shut his
lying,
libelous mouth and never mention my name again or respond to my
posts
if I agreed to his pathetic attempts to harass me via telephone
and
give him some information, just about all of those with at least
half a
brain saw through his scam.

Incredible that you could see through a non-existent scam. A scam
that did
not involve any actual direct commumication, therefore no real
harrassment.
Apparently, half a brain is all you have.

You're an imbecile, duh-Mikey. Responding to a telephone number
tha
you dial in any way *is* communication, you idiot.

But it's not "direct" communication which is what I said.

I know, even if
you're too obtuse to recognize the fact, that it requires
"communication" to even identify telephone numbers you might use in
a
telephone call. And of couse, without other evidence, there is no
way
of knowing that the call was made you, moron.

It requires you to post the last 4 digits. in order to prove you were
able
to recieve the call. It does not require direct communication.

If some 3rd party has the last 4 digits in order to confirm they are
the
ones I used, you have independent verification.



Wrong. You could very easily lie about this as you have about other
things. You could give a 3rd party one set of numbers and then call
from another.

For what purpose.

r that it came from
your cell-phone, dimwit.

I won't use my cell phone since that is available through
information.

You really are quite naive to think that
anybody would not see through your scam.

There is no scam, so obviously, you invent one.


Another false statement. See above.


My prooposal, OTOH, is much
more concrete (although not foolproof) and likely to provide
verifiable
information.

I don't trust you not to use my voice in some unauthorised way.


If I did, you could claim I lied about promising not to do so here on
RAO. Besides, you don't have to say anything other than your name and
a few other pieces of information that prove you are who you say you
are.

Just like you could if I didn't tell the truth about what number I called
from.

Obviously, there was (and is) no reason to
trust him, given his despicable history.

My history of asking pointed questions that you refuse to answer,
like why
you made an unprovoked personal attack in the Julian Hirsch
thread?



Your history of lying about my identity, my professional
background,
and my credentials.

Except that I haven't lied about them, I've expressed doubts about
them.
IOW opinions.


False statrements such as the ones above are not opinions, since there
is evidence proving them to be false. They are lies.

It wasn't a false statement.


Your history of lying about attack threads and
many other things involving me.

None of which you seem to be able to prove.


Another lie. i've posted a stock answer several times providing
evidence of just one of your many attack threads.

Just one? I thught it would be easy to provide many snce you claim I do it
so often.

Your history of being disproven on
numerous occasions about your lies about unprovoked peronal
attacks. At
the end of this post, juust to refresh your menory, I'll post one
of my
prio responses to your "questions". On second thought, let me do
it
now:



-----------------------------------------------------------------------

A couple of observations, should be added re. my post of April 9,
2004,
which is reproduced below:

1. In the first example of libel by McKelvy which I cite, he
initiated
libel thread with the title "Richman's ethical lapses". It is
worth
noting that he does not and CAN NOT list any.

You missed the comment on that post, albeit a small one.

So obviously, his
sole
purpose was to libel and defame another person.

OSAF

I chose to ignore this
piece of unprovoked garbage which he initiated. As did every other
RAO
poster.


Then whay are there other posts in the thread?

2. As of the time of this writing, 4:00 PM EST on 4/10/04, the
proven
liar and libeler Mckelvy has failed to respond directly to the post
reproduced below. It is obvious that his latest bluff/bull**** has
been called and he's been exposed for what most on RAO already have
known him to be for a long time - a hatemongering, bitter,
delusional
liar and character assassin whose primary purpose in posting on RAO
is
to smear others with whatever lies, libelous false claims and
libelous
labels of other people his diseased, delusional "mind" (such as it
is
in its primitive state) can regurgitate.

3. Proven liar and libeler McKelvy has been challenged to submit
his
delusional "complaints" about my professional and ethical behavior
(about which he has admitted he knows nothing - one of the few true
things he has ever said) to the appropriate licensing board in my
state. Of course, he has failed to do so, most likely because he
knows
that he's full of it, and will be sued by me after he does so.

4. I could have provided many more examples of McKelvy's compulsive
lies and libels against me, but felt that for now, 2 would be
sufficient. Pending the results of Mr. Wheeler's case, and in
consultation with my attornies, I may elect to pursue legal action
against him and use a quite impressive and lengthy file of false,
libelous claims he has made against me as evidence. No doubt, he
will
"help" by continuing to provide further evidence that can be used
against him.

5. I apologize for the lengfh of this post in advance, but in
consideration of McKelvy's obvious compulsive, pathological
responses
which almost always consist of further lies and libelous false
statements about me, this response is IMHO, quite appropriate.

6. This response will be the one used in the future to deal with
McKelvy's subsequent sociopathic, delusional, false, and libelous
personal attacks against me.




Mike McKelvy continues to avoid providing proof of his slander:
From: (Bruce J. Richman)

Mike McKelvy wrote:


From: (Bruce J. Richman)


deletion of further lies in which McKelvy tries to avoid
responsibility for
lengthy history of lying and committing slander re. my
credentials,
training
and professional activities.

This despicable scumbag, after first admitting he knows nothing
about
my
credentials, training and professional activities, then laughingly
trying to
claim his slanderous bull**** was merely opinions, and now
attempting
to
deny
all responsibility for his ridiculous lies ? insults the
intelligence of
all
RAO readers.

His requests for "proof" ? like all his imbecilic grunts and
mutterings
concerning me ? are a joke. As is his very RAO existence.

While he continue to deny slandering me, and requesting proof, his
credibility
remains zero (except perhaps, in the eyes of his hero, Krueger).

His false claims re. my professional background are a matter of
Google
record,
and virtually all RAO readers at all familiar with this
sociopath's
imbecilic
bull**** re. my background know this to be the case.

Since he's been purveying lies about me, he needs to present the
proof for
all
his nonsense, or stick his head further up the orifice in which
it's
obviously
been inserted for so long.




Bruce J. Richman



repetitive bull**** similar to that pruveyed over a 6 year period
by
this
pathological liar and proven slanderer deleted

For this pathological liar, all false claims about another person's
training,
credentials, professional experience, etc. ? are only "opinions" ?
a
piece of
bull**** nobody other than this lying cretin believes.

Here's just one example of his slander:



http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...thbp0ffk2j625%

This is the message I get when going to the above link.

Sorry, the document you requested is not available. You can visit
the main
page.


40corp.supernews.com&rnum=7&prev=/groups%3Fq%3DMcKelvy%2Band%2Blicensing%2
Bboard%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF?8%26sa%3DN%26t ab%3Dwg

Note that this was an attack thread started by McKelvy, in which
this
fool,
reproduces the Ethical Code followed by psychologists.

Note the slanderous title of the post.

Note also the question, this proven slanderer asks in the last line
after
quoting the Ethical code.

Needless to say, this pathological liar has no evidence that I have
ever
committed any ethics violations, and in fact his use of the title
of
this
thread, to which nobody responded, constitutes slander.

I have directly challenged this despicable cretin and proven liar
to
submit any

complaints he has to the Florida State Licensing Board. He has
refused
to do
so, because he knows he's been lying about me for 6 years.

This fool, in a conversation with Scott Wheeler commiitted another
blatant lie:


"The person claiming to be B.J. Richman, a Ph.D is a fake as should
be
obvious to anybody with more than 2 active neurons."

The reference for this is

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...igk0458h89%40c
orp.supernews.com


And here's what I got for the above.

Sorry, the document you requested is not available. You can visit
the main
page.

Now, no doubt, proven liar and slanderer McKelvy will claim he's
just
voiced an
opinion, but defamation and libel of a licensed psychologist, whose
identity is

acknowledged and has been proven on RAO to the satisfaction of
virtually all
conscious lifeforms with the exception of McKelvy and Krueger, is
*not*
an
opinion.

His lies are a matter of public record, and these 2 examples are
just a
few of
many that could be easily obtained from the Google record.

He has also deliberately ignored the following evidence presented
on
Google:

"The University of Texas at Austin, has long had one of the most
highly
regarded
doctoral programs in Clinical Psychology in the United States (top
10
ranking). Since I had the good fortune to have a very good record
in
my
Master's propgram at Clinical Psychology at Boston College,l and
perhaps
becauise I hit the 99th %ile on the Graduate Record Examination
(Verbal
Portion) and the 99th %ile examination on the Psychology
Acvhievement
section,
I had the rather odd experience of being actively recruited by
schools
to which
I applied. (I had always thought this just happened to jocks, but
I
was
wrong). One unforgettable day, I got a call from the head of the
Clinical
Psychology program at the University of Texas, a Dr. James Bieri,
who
basically
said "We've seen your application, we'd like you to come here, and
we're
prepared to make you a nice offfer". That nice offer, which I
accepted, turned
out to be a NIMH (National Institutes of Mental Health) Traineeship
in
Clinical
Psychology, for an unlimited period of time, with no strings
attached
other
than that I meet the academic requirements of the program (maintain
a B
average).. It took care of all my expenses (tuition, room & board,
books,
etc.) and gave me s small stipend to live on as well. Some of my
classmates
congratulated me on my good fortune (many of them had to accept
teaching
assistantships to help pay their bills, while all I had to do was
hit
the
books). The program turned out to be a real meatgrinder (as one of
my
classmates put it). It made my undergraduate program at an elite
"small Ivy
League school" (Bowdoin College) and my M.A. program seem like
kindergarten.
Almost everybody in my entering class of about 20 had either a Phi
Beta Kappa key, was published and or came from Ivy League schools
or
places
like U. of Chicago, Stanford or Berkeley. Of the 20 who started
the
program,
only 5 of us survived and got our doctorates. It took not only a
high
degree
of intelligence and perserverance, but also a large ability to deal
with the
stress of knowing that you were in a program with a very high
attrition
rate
and some professors, who frankly, until you got to the 2nd year and
had
"paid
your dues", didn't give a damn if you survived or not. I'll never
forgot one
of my Statistics professors who used to get up in front of the
class
and say
"Even if you don't make it through graduate school, you can still
be a
good
citizen""

and the following:

"I was accepted for an Internship in Clnical
Psycnology at Massachusetts General Hospital, which I accepted and
completed"

and the followiong:

"After obtaining my doctorate, I was
also accepted for postdoctoral training at Temple Medical School,
Department of
Psychiary, Institute for Behavior Therapy, in Philadelphia. I
enjoyed
my time
there had learned a lot under the supervision of the late Dr.
Joseph
Wolpe, a
world famous psychiatrist who is considered to be one of the
founders
of
Cognitive?Behavioral Therapy, the predominant type of therapy now
practiced by
most psychologists and psychiatrists (aside from pharmacotherapy).
"

The above quotes are from a post written in response to Howard
Ferstler,
another well known zealot, pathological liar, and purveyor of libel
on
RAO (not
surprisingly, frequently defended by Krueger, McKelvy's role
model).

The complete post (and thread) can be referened at:


http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...0203225629.076

19.00000418%40mb?mg.aol.com&prev=/groups%3Fq%3DFerstler%2Band%2BRichman%2B

and%2BUniversity%2Bof%2BTexas%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26 ie%3DUTF?8%26sa%3DN%26ta
b%3Dwg

So McKelvy's slandeous claims about quacks, frauds, and fakes are
nothing more
than the delusional, sociopathic rantings and repetitions of a
proven
liar and
libeler.

No doubt he will claim that this is all made up, but the only thing
made up are
his nonsensical departures from reality which pollute RAO whenever
he
continues
to libel me and others.

One further fact, which I may or may not be able to prove since it
happened a
long time ago, and I don't know if the radio station keeps records.
And I
challenge the cretin and liar, McKelvy, to disprove it ? LOL! :

In about 1976 or 1977, I was employed as the "Psychology Director"
of a
private
Cardiac Rehabilitation Center based in Miami, Florida. The center
ran
a
30?day, interdisciplinary inpatient program for patients who were
either at
high risk for cardiac disease or had already undergone such
procedures
as
cardiac bypass surgery. My main responsibility was to direct the
behavioral
component of this intensive program (which also involved
dieticians,
exercise
physiologists, cardiologists, and RNs). Areas such as stress
management,

smoking cessation, behavioral approaches to obesity, etc. were
among
the
targets that I had to address. One of my other responsibilities
was,
in
conjunction with the medical director, to promote the program
through
various
media appearances in both TV and radio. Two interviews in
particular
stand out
in my mind. The first came in the wee hours of the morning in New
York
City on
a nationally syndicated program ? "The Long John Nebel Show" (New
Yorkers old
enough may remember this). The second occurred in my home base on
the
79th
Street Causeway in Miami Beach at a radio station where Miami's
best
known talk
show host (at the time) was carrying forth ? I spent 2 hours being
interviewed
very incisively on the main topic which was "Stress and Heart
Disease".
I
remember coming away from that interview thinking that the
interviewer
was very
sharp and well prepared to really grill me. The name of the radio
station (and
I'm relying on long ago recall was, I believe either WKAT or WIOD).
The name
of the host ? Larry King.

Shortly thereafter, Larry left Miami and the rest is history.

I challenge the proven liar, and libeler, McKelvy to dispute any of
these facts
with any factual evidence he cares to fabricate from the diseased
empty
spaces
composing his deluded cranium.

No doubt he will choose to delete most of this post instead.

LOL!!!

(I apologize for appearing to be bragging about past or present
accomplishments, but since this despicable, loudmouthed,
unbelievably
stupid,
delusional, libeler and liar decided to completely embarass himself
once again,
it was just too tempting to not assist him in making a fool of
himself
and
exposing his sociopathic behavior once again).

Nothing more needs to be said about his lies, so when he responds
with
more
bull****, I will respond with a standard, previously used, canned
response that
perfectly describes this moron's basic character, motivations, and
irrational
behaviors.

Bruce J. Richman, Ph.D.
Licensed Psychologist
(FL PY 2543)


None of this "proves" anything.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's the kind of "history" you';r known for. I could have given
many
othe examples of your libelous false stateements.

No you can't.




Had I allowed the calls from
him to go through and then given him the last 4 digits of his
cell
phone, he could simply lie about this and claim either that (a)
it
never happened, or (b) the numbers that I would then publish
(perhaps)
on RAO were ones that I made up.

I never said I would use my cell phone, that number is available
through
information and would have been too easy for you to claim that I
called you
from it, even if I hadn't.


Unlike you, I'm not in the habit of making false statements about
telephone calls to other people.

What false statements would those be?


There is no question in my mind that
he has had and does not now have any intention of discontinuing
his
smear campaigns and libel.

The only one on a smear campaign right now is you.


That's another obvious lie. Do the names, Lionel and Krueger ring
a
bell? (Both of whom you support and imitate).

A breif glance at history shows that Lionel and I have had a few
dustups and
that ratonal people would not conclude that we are on friendly terms.

Rational people would conclude that the two of you share a strong
interest and character assassination and lying about others.

Rational people would easily conclude you are an established liar who makes
the most outrageous statements and claims opinions are lies and hearsay is
fact. You are one of the moist prolific flamers on this NG.

Lionel,
being a fervent Hamas supporter adn antiSemite, also appears to
subscribe to the old Arabic principle "the enemy of my enemy is my
friend"./

Either that or he just thinks you're a dick, since you've attacked him also.

All that said, its' very tempting to expose this lying character
assassin as one who has no intention of honoring proposals that
involve
termination of his compulsive need to attack me whenever he
can.

OSAF.

(That's just one of his wide range of psychiatric problems).
Therefore, I've decided to make a counterproposal that will be
far
less
likely for him to cheat and sabotage. Just as there is a tape
of
Krueger talking to Graham which many of us have heard and know
to
be a
reality, despite Krueger's denials, my proposal also involves a
tape.

(1) I will designate a time for McKelvy to call the telephone
number
that he claims he has recently called several times.


It's not a claim and if you have caller ID you would know that I did.

I said 3 times.


Several = 3 as well as other numbers in common parlance.


(2) If he calls that number at the time I specify, he will get
an
answering machine with my voice and name announced, with a
request
that
he leave a message.


I'd rather call at a time of my choosing, one that would be during
normal
business hours. Not one where you could pre-arrange with someone.


That would be your paranoid ideation working ovewrtime again.

Possibly but I still want to pick the time.

The time
UI specify will be during normal business hours, but during the normal
business hours of an East Coast psychologist.

Check with one and see if you can find out their normal hours. :-)

(3) He should then leave his name, telephone number, and mailing
address on the tape.


You can get all that from information.

All I *might* get would be a listing for a person with the name,
Michael McKelvy. That would not prove in any way that you are that
person. Only a telephone call with verifiable information will do
that.

You can call me, twit.


(4) I agree not to publish this information without his
permission.
However, I will announce that i have received the information
and
post
it in a way that it can not be identified (omission of numerals
and
letters).

(5) In return, McKelvy must publically stipulate on RAO - in the
title
of a thread - that he will refrain from ever mentioning me or my
professional activities again on RAO.

I already stopped referencing your professional activities until you
started
bringing it up again, twit.


Bull****, liar. Your propoisal and numerous other statements you have
made are designed to keep your smear campaign going on ad infinitum.

Bruce you've brought it many times since then, I have not except in response
to you.


(This is no more than he
promised to do in his proposal).

Actually, I said if you agreed to my proposal and could meet my
request, I
would shut up about you forever.


My counterproposal basically says the same thing. However, it
requires
that you acknowledge this on RAO. If you plan on keeping your
word,
you should have no problem iwth announcing it on RAO.

Since it's aprt of my original proposal, what's the point?



What's the objection?

Because I know that you will keep on lying about me. I'll stop talking
about yuour obviousl lack of professionalism and you stated profession, but
I reserve the right to call you when you lie and smear anyone. The same
right you already have.


Further, he must agree and stipulate
that my attacks on Krueger or anybody else that attacks me DO
NOT
GIVE
HIM ANY EXCUSE TO JUMP IN AND START FLAMING AWAY AS HE HAS DONE
OFTEN
IN THE PAST.

Tell me why you flamed him in the Julian Hirsch thread.



Irrelevant.

Not when you say you don't flame people without cause, liar.


Why have you attacked me on numeous occasions when I've
retaliated against Krueger's smears.

Because your idea of a smear is someone telling the truth about you.

Why do you think that attacks
against Krueger in response to his insuls require you to get involved?
Have you ever heard the phrase "mind your own business"?


Have you. The Julian Hirsch thread is a prime example of you not doing
that.



The reason for the tape recorded answering machine response
requirement
is quite simple. Just as a part of Krueger's conversation with
Graham
was posted to RAO (and a much larger, complete portion sent to
many
of
us), if McKelvy denies or lies about making this call in the
manner
specified, I'll have proof that he's lying. Given his history,
that's
a reasonable approach.

What's unreasonable about posting the last 4 digits of a number I
call you
from, that a 3rd party will know in advance?


See above.


Of course, if he handles this correctly, no information will be
given
out other than that described above.


For those of you who remember Gene Steinberg, after a long
period
of
nasty exchanges, the two of us spoke on the telephone and aired
our
differences. After that, there were no more hostilities.
Unlike
McKelvy, both Stewart Pinkerton and Paul Wagner, two former
posters
who, like Leslie Van Vreeland, made the mistake of engaging in
personal
attacks thorugh lying about my credentials - had the integrity
to
issue
public retractions when they quickly found out that their
statements
were both false and libelous because of evidence they obtained.
Another psychologist (industrial, I think) who used to post
here,
and
is, I believe an acquaintance of both Nousaine and Krueger, is a
man by
the name of Doug Stabler. As I recall, he lives in Palatine,
Illinois,
or did the last time I corresponded with him. He also knows the
truth.
McKelvy should do no less than issue a public retraction re. his
comments about my identity, professional activities, and
credentials.

Doofus, I agreed that if JJ said you were who you said you were
that
was
good enough for me. When is the last time I questioned whether or
not you
were a shrink? The person who continually brings it up is YOU!

I stated some time ago that the problem was less about your
profession, than
it was about the fact that choose to try and become a professional
asshole.



You're full of ****, asshole. You've made numerous comments about
"bean counters", "ethical lapses" and other idiotic false
statements
that have absolutely nothing to do with whether or not I met with
Jim
Johnston or anybody else.

Those were the things I was told about you by Gindi. You can believe
it or
not, I don't care.


You're lying again. No psychologist would claim I've made any ethical
lapses, since I haven't, and that is clear to all knowledgable people.

I didn't say Gindi commented on ethical lapses, he said you were a bean
counter and had no practice.


The fact that your attack thread with that title got no responses
speaks for itself.

Better check again, there are responses, the first one from Morein IIRC.

You failed to verify libelous information, yet
passed it on, claiming you "had it on good authority". That was a lie.

It was a belief.

The information was untrue and the person you claim told it to you waw
not a "good authority", since he knows nothing about me other than the
fact that I'm a lice4nsed psychologist.

I believed he did. My mistake, maybe.

(And that is a matter of
public record). In fact, he's never met me. So you, as always,
anxious to sling more libelous mud, just passed on a bunch of bogus
bull****.

No, no I was just anxious to puncture a pompous, lying, flaming,
unprofessional windbag.

The fact that you even make a proposal now -
after 7 years of lying and libeling me - clearly indicates that you
still haven't gotten the message that you'be been discredited
concerning your bull**** about me.

Ask me if I care. You sure seem to, much more than I do.

You persist in makinig phony
requests for "proof" that are clearly designed to be sabotaged
and/or
otherwise ignored by you.


Not true at all. First, you know my name, you know how to get my phone
numbers and you could harrass me in return. I'm not Singh, I keep my word.
Come to think of it I'm not you, I keep my word.

No, it shows that you still continue to act like an asshole and you
still
make **** up, and scream about imagined wrongs.



Your proposal was your invention and indicates that you're a delusional
asshole that continues to believe the bull**** you spew on a regular
basis.

It indicates I'd like to find out if you have access to the phone number
listed for Bruce J. Richman.

Your proposal was soundly ridiculed as the bugus attempt most
of us know it to be - just another cheap attempt to get ammjunitition
for another smear dampaign.

By a bunch of ridiclous people who live to smear.


My original proposal stands. Pick a time for me to call you, then
using
caller I.D. which I assume you have, post the last 4 numbers of
the
phone I
call from. That's it. It does have to be the number listed as
belonging to
Bruce J. Richman PhD. in N. Miami, Fl. You don't have to talk to
me.
In
fact I have no desire to talk to you.

If you like I will give the number I intend to call you from to a
neutral
3rd party like Sander or Ruud, so they can back up the story and
make
you
more comfortable that I'm not cheating.

"Bruce J. Richman" said:

For those of you who remember Gene Steinberg, after a long period of
nasty exchanges, the two of us spoke on the telephone and aired our
differences. After that, there were no more hostilities.

To be honest, I have had many private e-mail conversations with
Michael, and that makes that I respect him, despite the fact that we
don't agree on many things.

I believe it was Marc Phillips who said something along those lines
earlier: when you're getting acquainted outside of RAO, many
misconceptions (let's keep it at that) are cleared up.

For one thing, I think Michael's viewpoints are equally valid as those
of others here. That goes for audio, but as well for politics and
other things.

It's not necessary to agree with someone to still respect him, IMO.

It saddens me that two people who I think of as online friends, are
fighting a pointless war for a long time now (is it really 7 years?)

It would make me feel better if the 2 of you would settle this once
and for all.

And what's more, it will probably make you two feel better as well!

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

Sander deWaal wrote:
"Bruce J. Richman" said:

For those of you who remember Gene Steinberg, after a long period of
nasty exchanges, the two of us spoke on the telephone and aired our
differences. After that, there were no more hostilities.

To be honest, I have had many private e-mail conversations with
Michael, and that makes that I respect him, despite the fact that we
don't agree on many things.

I believe it was Marc Phillips who said something along those lines
earlier: when you're getting acquainted outside of RAO, many
misconceptions (let's keep it at that) are cleared up.

For one thing, I think Michael's viewpoints are equally valid as
those
of others here. That goes for audio, but as well for politics and
other things.

It's not necessary to agree with someone to still respect him, IMO.

It saddens me that two people who I think of as online friends, are
fighting a pointless war for a long time now (is it really 7 years?)

It would make me feel better if the 2 of you would settle this once
and for all.

And what's more, it will probably make you two feel better as well!

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

Sander, I don't attack people because of their views on audio,
politics, music, or other subjects. As McKelvy clearly knows, we have
even, believe it or not, agreed re. the basic problems inherent in the
Israel-Palestinian conflict.

All that said, unlike McKelvy, I have not made false statements about
his identity, job activities, or educational background except in an
obviously satirical manner, and even then, only after 7 years of
provocations on those subjects. As you might appreciate, I didn't get
my training, degrees, and professional activities by sending in a check
(cheque, money order) to some "paper mill" that delivers phony
credentials. Therefore, I don't, unlike cretins like Lionel and
McKelvy, attack the credentials of other people. Some things are over
the line, at least for me, if not for MeKelvy, Krueger (who has called
another poster a "pedophile", and Lionel, a known antiSemite and
purveyor of bigotry and other forms of ignorance-based babble).

"Bruce J. Richman" said:

All that said, unlike McKelvy, I have not made false statements about
his identity, job activities, or educational background except in an
obviously satirical manner, and even then, only after 7 years of
provocations on those subjects. As you might appreciate, I didn't get
my training, degrees, and professional activities by sending in a check
(cheque, money order) to some "paper mill" that delivers phony
credentials. Therefore, I don't, unlike cretins like Lionel and
McKelvy, attack the credentials of other people. Some things are over
the line, at least for me, if not for MeKelvy, Krueger (who has called
another poster a "pedophile", and Lionel, a known antiSemite and
purveyor of bigotry and other forms of ignorance-based babble).

I assume you want these things to stop then, after 7 years?
I think if ever the opportunity was there, it is now.

I know I'm being naive and idealistic and all that, but I'm quite
certain that Michael isn't happy with the current state of things as
well.

Yes, it may take some effort, but you both can show that you can rise
above yourselves and your differences and make an end to it now.
That is, if BOTH of you are willing.

In your own interest, and that of Michael, I think it is high time you
pull the plug on this. Really. And I don't think it is even necessary
to call eachother. You can settle this on RAO, or e-mail.

BTW I'm asking you now, but at the same time this is aimed at Michael.

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

Sander deWaal wrote:

"Bruce J. Richman" said:

All that said, unlike McKelvy, I have not made false statements
about
his identity, job activities, or educational background except in an
obviously satirical manner, and even then, only after 7 years of
provocations on those subjects. As you might appreciate, I didn't
get
my training, degrees, and professional activities by sending in a
check
(cheque, money order) to some "paper mill" that delivers phony
credentials. Therefore, I don't, unlike cretins like Lionel and
McKelvy, attack the credentials of other people. Some things are
over
the line, at least for me, if not for MeKelvy, Krueger (who has
called
another poster a "pedophile", and Lionel, a known antiSemite and
purveyor of bigotry and other forms of ignorance-based babble).

I assume you want these things to stop then, after 7 years?
I think if ever the opportunity was there, it is now.

I see no evidence that McKelvy has any intention of stopping his
unprovoked personal attacks. As recently as yesterday, he jumped into
a thread inolving Lionel and I with idiotic comments about medications
and restraints. And then he gets selective amnesia and claims he
doesn't commenet on my professional behavior. As for Krueger and
Lionel, the Google record clearly indicates that they have no desier
tro cease making hostile comments. Krueger has been banned from RAHE
because of this type of behavior. AFAIK, Lionel ahs never posted there
or to any other moderated newsgroup that would force him to clean up
his act.

If it were up to me, RAO would, like some other NGs, have a certain
degree of self-moderation, and flame wars would not be in evidence.
However, that requires the cooperation of others. There is a Google
record of Krueger actually opposing attempts to make RAO a moderated
newsgroup, if you recall. Doug Haugen, myself, and several others
tried to do this at one time, and Krueger predictably opposed it,
claiming that the moderators would be "controlled" by a "clique"
opposed to his views. His reasons for opposing moderaton were obvious.




I know I'm being naive and idealistic and all that, but I'm quite
certain that Michael isn't happy with the current state of things as
well

Yes, it may take some effort, but you both can show that you can rise
above yourselves and your differences and make an end to it now.
That is, if BOTH of you are willing.

In your own interest, and that of Michael, I think it is high time
you
pull the plug on this. Really. And I don't think it is even necessary
to call eachother. You can settle this on RAO, or e-mail.

BTW I'm asking you now, but at the same time this is aimed at
Michael.

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "


Sander, here's an example of the kind of libelous garbage that McKelvy
routinely posts:

Michael McKelvy Jan 9, 11:14 pm show options

Newsgroups: rec.audio.opinion
From: "Michael McKelvy" - Find messages by this
author
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 07:14:17 GMT
Local: Sun, Jan 9 2005 11:14 pm
Subject: Test of Newsreader
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse


"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
oups.com...


Lionel wrote:




- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Bruce J. Richman a =E9crit :

More bull**** that practically nobody believes except you. Your
[repetititon]


of [tyhe] same lies over and over again is clear evidence that you
[contuinue] to
deny reality.

Seems that Bruce is close to the end...
I don't understand why his nurse still autorises him to ramble on
Usenet. ;-)


Bruce J. Richman
Parapsychologist


Lionel's obvious idiocy is more predictable than anything else on RAO.
The voices in his head are once again telling him to make a fool of
himself - not that he needs any encouragement to do that



..

It's kind of startling how all of the people who don't seem to like all
seem
to be crazy.



His lobotomy
just increased his already considerable level of stupidity and
meaningless babble


..

Hmmm, and yours comes from where or should I say what?



I guess the French mental institutions are not too
effective in treating village idiots. They should consider euthanasia
as a favor to his fanily


..

More of that professional restraint. Speaking of restraints, are your
new
ones comfortable?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Note the last sentence, in which once again, McKelvy atempts to
question my professional behavior, even though RAO has nothing to do
with my professional behavior. He has lied continuously about "not
mentioning my profession", while continuing to insinuate that a
psychologist has no right to strike back at brainless idiots like
Lionel, a known antiSemite, signature forger, and mindless babbler of
insults towards almost everybody on RAO.

No rational person would trust a liar like this that falsely states as
recently as today that he has not "brought up" my profession, while as
recently as last night, attacked it. His false claims that no proof
has been provided are further evidence of his lack of honesty.

If he wants this to end, he can accept my proposal and quit playing
games. I am not self-desttructive enough to use any tape recording I
have without another person's permission, so his lack of trust is a
strawman, and he knows it. If I post the tape on RAO, he can report me
to the appropriate licensing board and legal authorities. He's just
looking for a way to continue his attack strategies through use of a
phony proposal that is easy to sabotage.

"Bruce J. Richman" said:

If it were up to me, RAO would, like some other NGs, have a certain
degree of self-moderation, and flame wars would not be in evidence.
However, that requires the cooperation of others.

I agree, but at the same time I think self-moderation starts with
oneself.

Scary, this feels to me like a deja-vu.

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

McKelvy said:

More of that professional restraint. Speaking of restraints, are your
new ones comfortable?


BJR said:

Note the last sentence, in which once again, McKelvy atempts to
question my professional behavior, even though RAO has nothing to do
with my professional behavior. He has lied continuously about "not
mentioning my profession", while continuing to insinuate that a
psychologist has no right to strike back at brainless idiots like
Lionel, a known antiSemite, signature forger, and mindless babbler of
insults towards almost everybody on RAO.

No rational person would trust a liar like this that falsely states as
recently as today that he has not "brought up" my profession, while as
recently as last night, attacked it. His false claims that no proof
has been provided are further evidence of his lack of honesty.

If he wants this to end, he can accept my proposal and quit playing
games. I am not self-desttructive enough to use any tape recording I
have without another person's permission, so his lack of trust is a
strawman, and he knows it. If I post the tape on RAO, he can report me
to the appropriate licensing board and legal authorities. He's just
looking for a way to continue his attack strategies through use of a
phony proposal that is easy to sabotage.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I do believe that McKelvy infringes with your freedom to be free of
headaches and with your enjoyment to express your views at Rao.

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
"Bruce J. Richman" said:

All that said, unlike McKelvy, I have not made false statements about
his identity, job activities, or educational background except in an
obviously satirical manner, and even then, only after 7 years of
provocations on those subjects. As you might appreciate, I didn't get
my training, degrees, and professional activities by sending in a check
(cheque, money order) to some "paper mill" that delivers phony
credentials. Therefore, I don't, unlike cretins like Lionel and
McKelvy, attack the credentials of other people. Some things are over
the line, at least for me, if not for MeKelvy, Krueger (who has called
another poster a "pedophile", and Lionel, a known antiSemite and
purveyor of bigotry and other forms of ignorance-based babble).

I assume you want these things to stop then, after 7 years?
I think if ever the opportunity was there, it is now.

I know I'm being naive and idealistic and all that, but I'm quite
certain that Michael isn't happy with the current state of things as
well.

Yes, it may take some effort, but you both can show that you can rise
above yourselves and your differences and make an end to it now.
That is, if BOTH of you are willing.

In your own interest, and that of Michael, I think it is high time you
pull the plug on this. Really. And I don't think it is even necessary
to call eachother. You can settle this on RAO, or e-mail.

BTW I'm asking you now, but at the same time this is aimed at Michael.

--
A brief check of what I posted during the first few days of this month shows
I wasn't attacking anybody. It was and is my full intention to post on topic
and to be respectful even in the face of provocation. See where it got me?

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
"Bruce J. Richman" said:

For those of you who remember Gene Steinberg, after a long period of
nasty exchanges, the two of us spoke on the telephone and aired our
differences. After that, there were no more hostilities.

To be honest, I have had many private e-mail conversations with
Michael, and that makes that I respect him, despite the fact that we
don't agree on many things.

I believe it was Marc Phillips who said something along those lines
earlier: when you're getting acquainted outside of RAO, many
misconceptions (let's keep it at that) are cleared up.

For one thing, I think Michael's viewpoints are equally valid as those
of others here. That goes for audio, but as well for politics and
other things.

It's not necessary to agree with someone to still respect him, IMO.

Exactly so.

It saddens me that two people who I think of as online friends, are
fighting a pointless war for a long time now (is it really 7 years?)

It would make me feel better if the 2 of you would settle this once
and for all.

And what's more, it will probably make you two feel better as well!

When is the last time I brought up B.J. on my own? Who is the one starting
this particular flamefest?