November 29, 2005

Joe Moreno justifies his stalking obsession

>> You have no one to blame for your reprehensible behavior but
yourself. After all YOU opened your BIG mouth and challenged me to
research information about you, for myself. Which I did. <<

What a paltry justification for following me around all over the Internet, logging all of my posts at various different forums (since 1998), JOINING them and making deliberate posts meant for my attention, interfering in my private life wherever possible, violating privacy by publishing a private journal for public view, as well as exhibiting general obsession characteristics. Not to mention writing various spurious articles with half-baked facts and equally half-baked conclusions which are incorrect and foolish.

>> d" your challenge to me and have him rule in your favor after you
bore him to near catatonia with your wordy and BORING diatribes.

Is Moreno looking in the mirror? :-) There is a very good reason why none of the anti-Sais ever bother to respond to his emails. I wonder what it is? :-)

> Since you lie and "embellish" so much, I simply enquired about your
claim that you were sexually abused at Bhaktivedanta Manor. They are
not aware of that claim either, it seems.

I was SEXUALLY abused, was I? :-) Typical Moreno, jumping to conclusions. :-)

LOL, ha ha ha ha ha. :-) This is also going on the record. :-)

>> Your blog entries were NOT embellishments. <<

My apologies. I forgot that Moreno has omniscience capabilities. It is very possible that, by virtue of his kinship with the Lord who resides with all souls as the Inner Witness, he was a direct but invisible witness to ALL of the "events" that I described in my blog. :-)

Nice try, Moreno. :-) LOL.

It is obvious WHY Moreno desperately clutches to my blog entries as "evidence". He needs it so badly in his fancy crusade against me. :-)

>> All along you have contended that your killuminati blog was
"private". <<

Blogs at Blogspot have the option of being listed. Since I chose "No"to having it listed, it is private for all intents and purposes. However, it is still "publicly accessible" by virtue of it being on
the Internet.

In any case, this does not justify Moreno's actions of taking a "private" diary journal and publishing them elsewhere for public view. Even an ordinary kid on the street you that even READING someone's diary is wrong. :-)

>> You told the truth in them because you didn't think anyone would
find them. IF you embellished them, you LIED in them. Either way, you
are a liar Sanjay. You are not fooling any of us. Who "embellishes"
what they eat in "private" blogs? The more you try to explain away
your blog, the more comical you sound. <<

Nice try at twisting the subject, again. :-) Of course it is a matter of opinion regarding the probablity of "lying". I have all along stated that embellishments were made for a specific audience, namely, my subscribers. It is really none of Moreno's business. :-) And I personally do not care if he reads my blogs with glee. What I DO object to is the ethical violation of publicly publishing "private" diary entires where, even along with the embellishments, I do communicate some private thoughts.

For all of Moreno's guff about morality, ethics and humanity, he stands as a violator of all three based on his own actions and commentary.

And of course this goes on the record. :-)