to Jose (PS)
plf13 at student.canterbury.ac.nz
Wed Nov 27 14:31:54 MST 2002
> when I've criticized Phil for a his tendency to apolitical Barnes-bashing,
> gossip and rumor mongering.
Actually, Jose it isn't acceptable to make charges like this without
Everything I have posted on the list about the foul practices in the
cult are things that I was an *eyewitness* to in NZ or that Louis or
John Cox saw. Both Louis and John Cox have also posted about this.
John Cox yesterday posted about the last straw for him in the cult being
when Barnes personally intervened to cover up a sexual assault.
I find it extraordinary that you can refer to eyewitness accounts -
including of a cover-up of a sexual assault - as "gossip and rumor-mongering".
There's actually something else I want to add abut this before being
done with the cult.
Like I said above everything that people like myself, Louis and Jon Cox
have said is *eyewitness* stuff. Secondly, we have said it in public.
Anyone can dispute it, Barnes or any of his sidekicks can come on the
list and dispute it.
Your comments above, like a few made in the past by someone who I have
rather less respect for than I have for you, reminded me of an episode
of 'South Park'. A Catholic priest makes a speech against priests'
molestation of children. A load of other priests agree and even make
him their spokesperson and send him off to Rome for a gathering of
priests, cardinals and the Pope. he makes a similar speech there and
they all clap, but then it becomes obvious that there is a serious
crossing of wires. The priest is concerned about the disgusting
behaviour itself, whereas the cardinals, other priests and Pope are
merely concerned that it has become public knowledge. They don't want
it to stop, they just want the publicity about it to stop.
I find it rather depressing that when confronted with eyewitness
accounts of this Barnesite cesspool activity, there are a couple of
people who are outraged not at the disgusting activity itself but the
fact that, finally, it is out in the public domain.
This of course contrasts with how the Barnesites attack people. When
they didn't like what Jose wrote about them in relation to the Elian
case, they never came on here to argue in public with him, they wrote an
article in their own paper, complete with a snarky (unflattering) class
characterisation of Jose.
Last week a young activist and factory worker who has started getting
heavily involved in our circle here in NZ, but who was involved with the
Barnesites a few years ago, told me that it was very interesting getting
to know me coz when he was in the Barnesites they talked about me as if
I was "barely human".
The fact that everything I say is public whereas their preferred method
- and that of the one or two of their sympathisers who skulk around on
this list - is behind the scenes and behind the back is quite a telling
comment about who is involved in "gossip and rumor-mongering". So I
suggest to Jose that in future he be a little more careful in making
these kinds of allegations. And that he be rather less dismissive in
particular when we have the word of John Cox about the cover up of a
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
More information about the Marxism