"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.

Michael McKelvy wrote:
"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.


With a tape, nobody can lie.


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.



You have made repeated false statements about my identity, my
professsioinal activities, and my credentials.


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.



It proves that you've engaged in unprovoked personal attacks. And that
when you claim there is no evidence of this behavior, you're lying.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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.

Since you've repeated the same lies so often, it's easy to find
examples of them in the Google record.





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,

Rational people would conclude that McKelvy's statements above
represent those of a delusional compulsive liar who then tries to
bamboozle the public by calling his provably false statements
"opinions". McKelvy takes a back seat to nobody except Krueger when it
comes to smearing and defaming numerous RAO posters. He's been
poluting the RAO forum with his ridiculous lies and fantasies
constructed of imaginary vapor for many years.


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.

I've only attacked Lionel after he's attacked me. Lionel has attacked
everybody on RAO except Krueger - which says a lot about his ability to
objectively evaluate anybody. He can easily identify with assholes
like you, however.



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.


As I said in regards to my proposal, the call can be made to my
answering machine during a time that is mutually acceptable and during
my normal business hours.


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.


You can call me, ****head.




(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.



That's a lie. Last night you jumped into a post involving lionel and
me with the sole purpose of trashing my profesional activities. Your
selective amnesia for your own personal attacks is noted.



(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.



Bull****. You're lying about my professionalism, since RAO is not a
professional work environment and requires no standard of behavior from
me then that required of everybody else. Since you "reserve the right"
to attack me when I defend myself against others, they you obviously
have lied when you have said you'll shut up and not mention my name.
You have repeatedly demonstrated a tendency to launch personal attacks
against me in threads in which your name was never mentioned. That
just illustrates that all you care about is character assassination and
a never ending agenda to engage in more lies and libel. You've just
proven that you have no intention of honoring your own 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.

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



Irrelevant.

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


Bull****, liar. Krueger had flamed me on numerous occasions around the
same time as that post was written. Also, why did you jump in and
attack me in the smae thread? YOUR NAME HAD NEVER BEEN MENTIONED, BUT
YOU LAUNCHED ONE OF YOUR PREDICTABLE PERSONAL ATTACKS. Krueger has
claimed that he has the right to attack me whenever he chooses based on
past history. This claim was made recently. You claim you attack
people because they attack Arnie. Between the two of you, all we hear
is a bunch of self-serving rationalizations for smearing people
whenever you can. The two of you are totally dedicated, apparently, to
the continuation of personal attacks against myself and others. Your
excuses for your lengthy history of character assassination are totally
worthless and not credible.



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.


Bull****. Krueger's lies have been identified and documented by both
myself and several other RAO readers. You defend false statements by
both yourself and Krueger and then try and claim they are the "truth".
You can't provide any evidence that any of Krueger's smears involve the
truth, any more than you can substantiate your own lies about my
professional activities.



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.



Actually, it's a prime example of you doing that. You jumped right in,
forthing at the mouth like the rabid attack animal you become so often,
and started flaming away. Your name had never been mentioned in that
post.




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.


Lies which you passed on without any attempt to verify them. You also
lied when you claimed you had it on "good authority" - when in fact,
you had nothing but an alleged email from a person who doesn't post on
RAO and as we all know, used a number of aliases when he did in the
past. Also, Gindi has never met me.

Ask yourself this, dumbo. Why do you think that Gindi threatened you,
which is what you are now claiming? (And you still haven't divulged
the nature of the thrwat - which you decided to ignore). Let me
suggest a plausible reason. Because he knew, just like I do, that the
information was false and easily disproven, and he did not want his
name associated with it. Or alternatively, you've made the whole thing
up. Either way, you used it to further your smear campaign tactics.
That's why when you talk about Krueger telling the truth, you're be
totally hypocritical. You don't know what the truth is, or if you do,
deliberately avoid admitting it when it comes to your enemies.



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.


I already have. There were no responses. And even if there had been,
evidence of your libel in the title of that thread is just another
example of your dedication to character assassination and lying about
others on RAO. I'm still waiting for you (or anybody else) to forward
their "commplaints" to the Florida Board of Professional Regulation.
I've been in practice for a long time, and have never had an ethical
complaint filed against me by anybody - and that's a matter of public
record. You were once again lying through your teeth when you posted
that asurd thread title.




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.

Bull****. What would make a person that doesn't post on RAO, living in
another state, that has never met me, a "good authority". It was a
transparent attempt to engage in the type of mud slinging and
repetition of bull**** for which you are so well known.




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.



Your mistake was in not checking the facts. That is the same mistake
you make when you claim that Krueger's obvious lies about me are "the
truth". You make a lot of mistakes, but you don't give a damn, because
your goal is to provide negative information about other people that
you don't like. Whether it is true or false doesn't matter to you, as
this email bull**** clearly demonstrates.



(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.


Nobody other than yourself and Krueger fit that description. Your sole
goal was to continuue your length history of dishonesty, libel and
totally unsubtantiated smears based on your delusional belief system
about my behavior. Your idiotic descriptions of my behavior are
totally unsupported by any evidence you can provide. As usual, you're
just making things up as you go along.




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.


BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!! You're already looking for
excuses to break it before any agreement is even in place. You have no
business flaming me or anybody else just because we respond to
Krueger's flames with return fire. Your attempt to use that as ancuse
to continue your smear campaigns reveals your true intentions.
Otherwise, what you're really attempting to do is generate *more*
flames on RAO, not *less*, since you illogically believe that people
should pile on in arguments between two people and just flame away at
the person they disagree with, even when their name has not been
mentioned. Anybody who would say as you have "I attack you because you
attack krueger" (that's an approximate quotation) is clearly irrational
when making judgments. Using that kind of logic, this would mean that
all of Krueger's many enemies, and those that find you and Lionel to be
repulsive, should feel free to attack the three of you whenever you
attack anybody on RAO. Is that the kind of flamethrowing environment
you want? It seems that this is what you are advocating.






Come to think of it I'm not you, I keep my word.



Bull****. Like you kept your word to Gindi? You're a lying, dishonest
scumbag who has a lengthy track record of lies and libelous false
statements polluting this newsgroup. Tell Gindi how you "keep your
word", liar and hypocrite.

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.


Prove it. you're on record in this thread of proposing that you have
the right to flame anybody that attacks one of your very few fellow
flamethrowers, such as Krueger and Lionel. The people who ridiculed
your proposal saw it objectively as a transparent hoax, that you could
easily sabotage. Since you lie constantly about myself and others,
there is no reason to trust your "word" (I was going to use another but
decided to not refer to what it really is at ths time).


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