Today, believe it or not, is the ninth (9th) blogaversary of Whirled Musings. I imagine that some are either surprised or disappointed that this little outpost of the blogopshere is still whirling. Indeed, its failure to die is not from lack of effort on the part of some of the forces of evil in Scamworld. Most notably: the stupid, evil, psychopathic little prick who unsuccessfully sued me earlier this year.
But I'm still blogging. The orbit of my Whirled has been a little wobbly of late but it's still spinning. (And the above image was brought to you courtesy of a Google Images search result for Whirled Musings.)
I will have more Kevin Trudeau court docs to share soon, as well as other news about other scammers. And I'll get to that, slowly but surely, as I work to address some of the other Matters of Consequence with which I have been concerned for the past several months.
For now, I thank you once again for your support of this blog over its nine years (and counting!) of existence. And if you're wondering what to give a nine-year-old who has everything but money, there's always that "Donate" button at the upper left hand side of the Web version of this Whirled. Every little bit helps. Thanks!
34 comments:
Whirled Musings will end when you finally get cancer from all the negative emotions you obviously harbor, otherwise you wouldn't be writing a blog to bring people living their dreams down for so long. That's not something a happy successful person would do...
Oh, goodness. Have I brought you down, Cosmic C? Have I in any way compromised your own efforts to "live your dreams?" Or have I just thrown a few uncomfortable truths your way and threatened to shake your idolatry of some sociopathic grifter?
A more important question: Would the implied message here be that cancer couldn't happen to a more deserving person than I?
Actually -- and I'm really going out on a limb here, just taking a wild guess -- you sound very much as if you were inspired by that self-described great humanitarian and cancer curer, Not-Doktor Leonard Coldwell. I can just feel the love. Actually that Coldwell lunatic already "diagnosed" me with cancer, falsely claiming back in November 2013 that I had developed cancer (to go with the AIDS that he falsely claimed I have) because I am so jealous of him and his "champions" (his word for the suckers who were dumb or gullible or desperate enough to join his failed IBMS Masters Society)
If cancer is indeed caused by "negative emotions" I will be very surprised if he doesn't contract it -- not that I would wish that on anyone, not even Coldwell. Unlike that hateful little nut case, I don't wish physical harm to anyone, even to those like Coldwell who have seriously tried to endanger me. But Coldwell himself is all about the negativity, spewing vitriol and hatred every day on his social media. He has repeatedly spewed false nonsense about me and in a characteristic act of cowardice has published my personal information in efforts to get his stupidest and craziest fans to deal with me. That's criminal, in my opinion.
That said, Coldwell has frequently boasted that although virtually everyone in his biological family has had cancer, he has never, ever had it and will never, ever get it. Presumably, and in the context of this boast, he won't get cancer because he follows his own so-called prevention protocol, including guzzling his severely overpriced Bepure colon blow frauduct twice a year. He has also stated that he stays healthy by blowing off steam and not stifling his opinions.
In that case, I too should remain healthy. Because in truth, I'm not "harboring" anything "negative" here; I am freely expressing it!
It has occurred to me that if Coldwell were ever were to get cancer nobody would ever know it. He would keep it a secret, so that even if the cancer were to be terminal his fans could remain comfortably numb and safely in denial. I'm reminded of alt-cancer cures expert Hulda Clark (one of Coldwell's heroes, and one whose books are promoted by Coldwell's German "publisher" Jim Humble (and frauduct peddler in his own right)). Hulda unfortunately died of... cancer. May she rest in peace.
Anyway, thanks for the love and good wishes, "Cosmic Cancer." I will say this about you, and it's something my husband Ron observed when he first saw this comment: you seem to have chosen a highly appropriate and self-descriptive moniker to anonymously hurl your own toxicity and negativity my way. Why don't you reveal your true identity?
But at least I am willing, as always and despite the anonymity of many of the screeds, to publish posts that are critical of me and of my blog. This is in marked contrast to Loony Coldwell and any number of other scammers I've covered, such as Kevin Trudeau, who is of course, Coldwell's former b.f.f. (turds of a feather, as I always say).
Hi Connie,
Congrats on the 9 years. :)
Shared this link over at GinTruth but I haven't seen him post it up yet. Thought I'd share it here. An interesting read. I know it's not about the little nerd-runt Coldwell or his "I aM BS-ing you" organization, but it does speak to the delusions that him and his company keep - even when behind bars. (Like you say - "turds of a feather").
Great work with the blog and I look forward to it continuing. Hope you enjoy the article.
http://www.businessinsider.com/kevin-trudeau-interview-2014-12
Thank you for the supportive comments, VR. Much appreciated. As it happens I am very well aware of the Business Insider piece and I did enjoy it. In fact I probably should have been given credit for helping with it (the author had told me on the phone that he intended to acknowledge the extensive work I had done on this blog)... but that didn't happen. Anyway, here is my January piece about THAT January piece.
http://cosmicconnie.blogspot.com/2015/01/kevin-trudeau-interview-from-clink-and.html
Thanks again for stopping by!
I love Dr. C. I have bought numerous of his books to give to friends and family. A couple of the negative critics talk about how this is information that those who have been studying natural methods for years already know. However those of us who have not been studying it for many years can find this to be extremely helpful. Also one critic shows a couple emails where the reviewer contacted doctors in Europe who said they did not know Dr. Coldwell; however those are not the doctors that he lists in one addition of the book where he lists certain clinics in Germany. My husband and I met Dr. Coldwell at a conference. He was the guest speaker as a favor to a family friend. He could've used the opportunity to sell his instinct-based medicine, but he did not do that at all. He did not try to sell anything. We have had other keynote speakers at the same conference in the past who have taken the opportunity to sell their products or their training programs; however Dr. Coldwell did not do this. My husband and I also attended his breakout session on natural health. We found him to be genuine. He even made a point to come up and say goodbye to us at the end of the conference. I believe he has cured many people. He strikes me as the type of person who has a good sense of humor, joy in his life, and he is proud of what he has done. It seems as though his attitude is almost a take it or leave it… He gives the information and people can choose to use it ...and if they don't, they don't. Although he did not speak much of his religious beliefs, as a Christian, I feel that he may be one also. Perhaps if I never met him, and only read the book, I would have thought that he was trying to sell the IBMS program; however since I did meet him, I feel that he is sincere and truly wants to help people.
Hi, Chloe, and thank you for your respectful comment; it's such a refreshing break from the usual Coldwell fan (or Coldwell himself in some cases) calling me all kinds of hateful, abusive names and issuing death threats. Let me try to address your points. I will remain respectful to you because I think you deserve it, but (spoiler alert and warning) I will not be at all respectful to the person whom you are defending. This is long-ish so no doubt will have to be presented in multiple parts, since Blogger puts a character limit on comments.
I Googled your name and if you are indeed the person who comes up on the search results, it appears that you are a young, attractive, idealistic woman who is really into health and fitness. Perhaps you have a long and successful career ahead of you. Good for you; I wish you well. Just don't enter into any business deals with Coldwell because it will probably not end well; more than likely he'll end up heaping scathing verbal abuse upon you, or suing or threatening to sue you, or all of the above. If you want a recent example, look to "Earth Diet" cookbook author Liana Werner Gray, a former Coldwell buddy and cheerleader. You can read about that on a post on this blog called "Earth Diet evangelist v Bourbon Diet buffoon..." I'm not saying that Liana was faultless, and I think she made foolish mistakes in allying herself with Coldwell. Lesson learned, though.
But let's address your defenses of Coldwell. First, my own objections to Coldwell have never really been centered on the accusation that he regurgitates old information, although clearly he does. My initial criticism of him focused on the fact that for several years he knowingly promoted a fraud and a scammer (the Global Information Network (GIN) and its founder and owner Kevin Trudeau), until he was fired from GIN. He has claimed that he didn't know GIN was a fraud and that he was duped like everyone else. But he has also claimed that he found out about it more than a year before he "quit" GIN and that he got fired because he was telling people it was a fraud. He never can keep his stories straight.
Anyway, after he was fired he began masquerading as a big hero who had exposed a huge fraud and was going to help thousands of people get justice -- first through a class action suit that never materialized, and later through an utter failure of a "success" club that was little more than an incompetently promoted GIN ripoff (the IBMS Masters Society). All of the heroic, "we're all in the same boat" proclamations were just a cover for his own crass opportunism, well documented on my blog and others.
Other focal points for my criticism of Coldwell have always been my questions about the little man's extravagant boasts about his accomplishments, and about his reasons for leaving Germany and legally changing his name.
You may protest that this has nothing to do with natural health and the things that interest you, but it very much has to do with my beat on this hobby blog, which is how I got involved in the Coldwell saga in the first place.
I will continue this in my next comment.
[Continued from previous comment]
Regarding the issue of whether Coldwell repeats old information, I do have something to say. My argument would be with his constant insistence that he was the first or that he is the best of the lot when it comes to presenting any given information (or in many cases misinformation) to the world. He may have a few good things to say about stress and the importance of dealing with it. No argument there from me. But his books are full of pseudoscientific nonsense and bad advice (not to mention that the writing itself is pretty awful). Yes, there are some "truths" in them, and even some legitimate general criticisms of the medical profession and the pharmaceutical industry. (On the other hand, his hysterical tales about the medical profession and Big Pharma being after him and trying to kill him are just plain stupid, IMO. They are either a desperate or cynical marketing ploy, or the man is a few bubbles off of plumb... or both.)
As for the doctors who said they'd never heard of him, I am assuming you are referring to one of the lengthy negative reviews of a book of his on Amazon. But your argument is, I believe, irrelevant. If he were as accomplished and well known as he has been boasting for years and years, these and most other doctors almost certainly would have heard of him even if they never worked with him or met him, and even if he had never heard of THEM nor mentioned them in his books.
Given the area where you live, I'm going to take a wild guess that the conference where you met "Dr." C (who is no more of a real doctor than my dachshunds are) was one of Alex Lubarsky's NAVEL Expos. Am I right? That would have been the October 2014 event. Or maybe it was at that holistic health expo in Germany this past April, run by his buddy and "publisher" Jim Humble. Whether it was NAVEL or the Germany event or something else, I think it is reasonable to assume that "Dr." C was not just appearing as a favor to a family friend. It matters not whether he openly sold IBMS or not. He would not have spoken at such an event if he weren't getting $omething out of it -- even if just publicity.
And if your only impression of him was seeing him on his best behavior at a public event, where of course he would go out of his way to charm people and win new fans and possibly new clients, then I would suggest that your picture of him is far from complete. And it's quite possible that he went out of his way to charm you because... well, you're a young, attractive woman. In any case he is apparently in his element in front of an enthusiastic crowd and knows how to play to a crowd. But my sense is that he has never been able on his own to draw a crowd nearly as big as the crowds he played to when he was in Kevin Trudeau's GIN scam. (That pic he uses on social media all the time, of him standing on stage before a huge crowd, with the "Dr. C" logo Photoshopped on the background... that was a GIN event.)
But let's talk a little about that NAVEL Expo event (and again, for these purposes it doesn't matter whether that's the event you attended or not). He may very well have been charming at that event, and may very well have spurred some enthusiastic responses from the crowd. Before the event Coldwell was bragging about being the keynote speaker and Alex Lubarsky was heavily promoting him. I didn't know Alex from Adam; I had never heard of him before the boasting and promos for that event began. And at first I did not know about Alex's background as an apparent huge Kevin Trudeau fan/admirer, even though Trudeau is currently serving prison time for fraud. (His admiration for Trudeau made me question Alex's integrity when I found out about it.)
[continued in next comment]
[Continued from previous comment]
In any case on a whim I decided to participate on one of the Expo's public Facebook pages with some critical comments and links about the person that Alex seemed so proud to be having as a keynoter. A couple of other critical bloggers and observers (including GINtruth blogger Bernie O'Mahony) also did the same.
We were taken to task by Alex, who stood up for his choice. Even though he was snide and a tad arrogant, at least he remained pretty civil through the whole exchange. Coldwell, on the other hand, went nuts -- not on the NAVEL forums but on his own Facebook pages. Rather than rehashing it here, I'll simply point you in the direction of a blog post I wrote about the matter.
http://cosmicconnie.blogspot.com/2014/10/navel-gazing-with-lenny-coldwell-every.html
In that post I present several screen shots of rants by Coldwell. He refers to me as "Horny Connie," which is a reference to an outrageous lie he had begun a couple of months previously when he falsely and publicly accused me of killing his pit bull dog Blue. His big lie, besides the accusation that I killed his dog, was that I had killed the dog to get revenge because Coldwell had sexually rejected me. I can't decide if that is more nauseating or funny but I guess it's both, because I find Coldwell disgusting and have never met him, tried to meet him, nor tried to contact him in any way, shape or form.
Anyway, at the time of the original dog drama he publicly posted my home address and private cell phone number (the latter of which I have NEVER published) and told his crazy fans to get in touch with me. As a result I received numerous disturbing communications. Well, shortly before the NAVEL Expo he did the same thing again, publishing my contact information (including my address), urging people to help "stop" me, and even urging them to cc him on any communications they sent to me. Again I received some pretty disturbing stuff, the most disturbing one being an email that suggested my house might be burned down in the middle of the night as a result of the things I had written about "Dr." C. I have screen shots in the NAVEL post linked to above.
What kind of a sincere, joyful, genuine humanitarian does that kind of sick stuff, and deliberately tries to endanger his critics just for questioning his stories?
Just recently Coldwell posted something on Facebook that linked to an article about the "if you see something, say something" trend of encouraging people to snitch on their neighbors, friends and family. I don't support the idea of encouraging snitching myself, but that's not the point. The point is that Coldwell wrote that if anyone ever snitched on him, they'd better get their affairs in order because...well, the threat was clear. In a subsequent comment on the same thread he said that in some cities, snitches find that their houses burn down at 3 AM. Although nothing was directed at me (in the sense that my name was not mentioned, anyway), I felt a chill.
[continued on next comment]
[Continued from previous comment]
You say that you found Coldwell to be "genuine." Well, sociopaths and psychopaths can put on a good act of being genuine, authentic, sincere, even loving. "Proud of what he has done?" He certainly brags about his so-called accomplishments -- brags and brags and brags. But he offers no proof of anything, including that high cancer cure rate and those thousands of patients he has supposedly cured... or the number of mega-bestselling books he has... or proof of any REAL credentials... or proof that he cured his mother of cancer, cirhhosis, and hep C (17 years before hep C had even been identified by medical science!). His fans have to take all of that stuff on faith, and apparently many do. Those who question him get blocked, deleted, or sued. Or maybe worse... who knows. In the past he has darkly hinted of his willingness to hire hit men if necessary.
"Christian?" Well, Coldwell does promote at least one product I know of to the Christian market: a meditation CD set. And he wrote in one of his books that he is a Christian. But he has also written (more recently, on social media) that Jesus never existed or that if He did, He never performed the miracles the Bible talks about. So take that how you will. He has publicly sneered at the Christian concept of forgiveness, saying that most people who try to be forgiving are just suppressing their negative emotions, which will just give them cancer, which he says they deserve. He has repeatedly said that one of his guiding slogans is, "Never forgive, never forget, always get even." And Coldwell's reported misbehavior in...um...social situations really seems quite lacking in congruence with the profile of a sincere, committed Christian who walks the walk.
But heck, I'm no expert on religion, so maybe I just shouldn't comment on his Christianity or lack thereof. But maybe you shouldn't be so quick to assume that just because you are a Christian, and you "love" "Dr." C, then perhaps he is a Christian as well.
And as for having a sense of humor and joy in his life...wow. It seems to me that if Coldwell really had that much genuine joy in his life one would think he wouldn't have the inclination to spend most of his waking hours posting hateful messages on Facebook (not just about his critics; the man is full of hatred), and he most certainly would not feel the need to tell horrendous lies about us. Over the past three years he has repeatedly and falsely accused me of being an AIDS-infected former prostitute who is on Big Pharma's payroll; a sexual harasser (of him); a mentally ill person who is a danger to herself and others; a dog killer... and on and on and on. Clearly he fears me because I am not afraid to write the truth about him. He has falsely and publicly accused two other critical bloggers, the aforementioned Bernie O'Mahony and an Israeli blogger named Omri Shabat, of being gay, mentally ill child rapists. Clearly he fears them for the same reason he fears me. A joyful, loving, sincere humanitarian would not behave in such an abhorrent way.
You, dear Chloe, have been bamboozled. You're far from the first and unfortunately won't be the last. But of course, all of the above is "just my opinion." Your mileage may vary, as they say.
###
" that self-described great humanitarian and cancer curer, Not-Doktor Leonard Coldwell". Shouldn't it be "cancer kuhrer", like fuhrer?
LOL, Anon. Probably it should be "Krebs kuhrer," since "Krebs" is German for "cancer." On one of his recent Facebook posts, LoonyC misspelled Krebs, though. Apparently he is as semi-literate and prone to typos in his native language as he is in English (a friend of mine who is fluent in both languages, and has read many of Coldwell's German-language social media and web site offerings, clued me in to that fact).
Connie, since you are in the business of shaming people for your own benefit as a writer, might I suggest you read "So You've Been Publicly Shamed" by Jon Ronson. In one of the last chapters he talks about the role shame played in criminal and incarcerated person's say played in their downward spirals.
It's not a business and it hasn't really benefited me "as a writer." I am not sure what you're trying to communicate by recommending the book on shaming, but (to name but one example), people such as serial scammer Kevin Trudeau, who as it happens is now incarcerated, would have ended up in behind bars even if I had never written a word about him. In fact it could be said that he ended up behind bars because he is shameless, not because he was shamed. And virtually all of the scammers I write about seem to be similarly shameless.
I disagree. it has benefited you as a writer because it gives you a focus and something to write passionately about. And what you do, what you write is shaming the people you take issue with, who you perceive as worthy of your wrath. What I am trying to communicate by recommending the book on shaming, I communicated. I will add that there can be consequences to shaming people. In Jon Ronson's books he talks of inmates who shared about being shamed by others and how it started the life of violence that they now find themselves lost in. Whether people are shameless or not is not the issue I was pointing at. I was talking about what you do, which is to shame people. You shamed Coldwell and he sued you. I think it is naive of you to think you can shame people to the degree that you do and not expect some individuals to eventually take an interest in and come after you, in this case legally, as that person did. I am not advocating that in any way whatsoever but rather saying that if any writer shamed enough people over time, the odds of of there being some kick back are greater. And I know you, in your superiority and pureness, take the case, that anyone that finds their way into your musings crosshairs has it coming to them and they earned it. I know you see it all as justified for something you perceive that they did or did not do. AND, what you are up to is shaming human beings because they offend you in some way. I hope you will take the time to read "So You've Been Publicly Shamed"
And Kevin Trudeau is not a "serial scammer". "serial scammer" is just a catchy phrase that flows with your preferred writing style. Calling a person a "serial scammer" and other names dehumanizes them and turns them into to thing and clears the way for you to saying any terrible things about him and still be viewed as a good person. Kevin Trudeau may have broken laws and that eventually caught up to him. And Kevin Trudeau is someone you obviously do not like and do not trust and who you take issue with and you are entitled to speak up about that. The path you have chosen seems profoundly unhealthy to me, and you do it because it seems consequence free. And then there was that law suit that went nowhere.
Well said Connie!
I find it hilarious that people are ashamed to give their actual name when making comments, instead choosing to hide behind annonimity.
Ironic, isn't it, that Anonymous of April 11 at 3:45 PM is quite obviously trying to shame you into keeping silent about coldwell? I wonder whether he also thinks that Bill Cosby's victims should keep silent about having been raped, rather than describing his alleged behavior as being "shameful." Apparently sociopaths - as well as turds - of a feather stick together.
Anon August 11, I have been dealing with the "consequences" of writing this blog for more than nine years now. Hate mail, death threats, lawsuit threats and finally a (failed) lawsuit... I write not *because* I am complacent and think there will be no "consequences," but *in spite of* the fact that I know that "consequences" are always a possibility.
Judging by your snide comments about my "superiority" and "pureness," it would seem that you mistake me for some self-righteous person who deludes herself that she is without fault. Not true at all, and I am reasonably certain that it's not true of any blogger who tackles these topics from a critical viewpoint. But to accuse critics of being self-righteous and thinking themselves without flaws is one of the main (and one of the lamest) arguments leveled against us, generally by those who have some reason to be defensive.
I apparently misunderstood your original meaning about "benefit," since you put it in the context of the word "business." I thought you were talking about monetary benefits (and in fact, in Coldwell's asinine but now dismissed lawsuit I was falsely accused of financially benefiting from writing about him). While this blog has indeed provided a forum for me to express some of the issues that concern me, it is only a very small part of who I am and what I do. And in fact if I were to base my decision to blog or not to blog totally upon the risk-benefit ratio I would have given up the effort long ago.
You also seem to be conflating my efforts here with those of random bashers who try to publicly shame private citizens. The people whom I write about are public figures. Some are more minor public figures than others, but all are putting themselves out there as authorities or gurus or leaders. I don't think it is an exaggeration to say that all are either scammers or deluded or both. Moreover I don't dig into people's private lives or try to "out" private citizens. I criticize public figures whom I feel are fooling or even in some cases hurting others.
Due to Blogger's character limitation on comments I will continue this in my next comment.
[Continued from previous comment]
Anon, your point about name calling is valid only to the extent that to label anyone for any reason dehumanizes them to a certain degree. Duly noted. To post a negative opinion about anyone is to define them as "the other," and we all do it. To idealize someone and paint them as heroes without acknowledging their flaws is also dehumanizing, though. Just thought I would point that out.
In reality I am fully aware that Kevin Trudeau is a complex human being (and in fact I don't really even think he belongs behind bars). I've actually addressed those issues on this blog. But he is also a serial scammer and a liar who continues his scams and lies from prison. That's my opinion, which I think is well backed up with facts, though I also recognize that Kevin still has many fans and they don't feel they have been scammed.
There are many ways to dehumanize people, though. The self-help/pop-spirituality/alt-health gurus I snark about dehumanize their customers all the time. Individuals aren't humans to them so much as they are just names on a list, items to be mined and exploited for every penny that can be obtained. "The list is gold." "People are meat." It's a big sick machine, as my pal Salty Droid has so often said. And many of these gurus look at the faceless masses as losers, even as they are taking their money.
Do you really want to get into the details about Coldwell and how he has tried repeatedly to shame and dehumanize ME, merely for asking questions about his credentials? I wrote my first blog post about him in May 2012. In September of that same year I updated and revised in order to clarify some points that were not clear. For more than four months I heard NOTHING from him or any of his "legal team." Not a peep. Nothing.
Then in October of that same year he began writing public posts ABOUT me, lying that I am a former prostitute on Big Pharma's payroll. For years he wrote lie after lie about me, saying I have AIDS, saying I sexually harassed him, saying I killed his dog, and even publishing my home address and private cell phone number and trying to get his nutty fans to come after me. People sent me threats and one threatened to burn my house down in the middle of the night. Coldwell ENDANGERED me. He tried repeatedly to dehumanize me on his public Facebook posts, referring to me as mentally ill, mentally retarded, and "that thing." The sham of a lawsuit he filed earlier this year was yet another attempt to silence me.
Did I "shame" Coldwell? Apart from the fact that he is terribly volatile and ends up threatening just about everyone who questions or criticizes him, he is his own worst enemy and his own worst "shamer." He parades as a public figure and an authority on health and politics and history, and yet he continually makes ludicrous PUBLIC remarks about everything from chemtrails to cancer cures to the New World Order. He continually publishes misinformation and lies. That's his right, of course. But regarding some of the things he has done besides just make a fool of himself, in my opinion he deserves something more serious than the "shaming" he has received on this blog. He deserves legal action taken against him. But because that costs money, I don't see it happening any time soon.
One more point: You seem very fixated on the incarceration issue as it relates to public shaming. Are you worried that one of the subjects I have written about is on the verge of committing some violent action that will get them incarcerated? Do tell.
But you have no call to lecture me about public shaming.
Thank you for your support, Max!
Bernie, I agree about the cowardice of many Anonymous commenters. Nevertheless I continue to allow them on my blog. This of course is in contrast to most of the people I write about, who won't even allow criticism on their blogs, even if the person uses his or her full real name.
Ron, it does seem that the Anon commenter is trying to "shame" me into silence about Coldwell, but on the other hand it also appears the person is kind of a Trudeau supporter. Or maybe s/he is just arguing for the sake of arguing, LOL.
"I write not *because* I am complacent and think there will be no "consequences," but *in spite of* the fact that I know that "consequences" are always a possibility. "
You get it. That is almost all I wanted to say but wound up saying more and will just wrap up my thoughts here.
And again, you turn people into objects so you can give yourself the licence to act unkindly and still view yourself as a good person. You call a person a "public figure" to dehumanize them. There is no such thing as a "pubic figure". It is critics and people who work in the media and who make a living off of others that most use the term "public figure" the way you have here.
"merely for asking questions about his credentials? " Merely? you minimize your actions here. It is well known what you write about and how long you are willing to follow and shame a person if you wan, and while I am not updated on the Coldwell experience, i am sure he took issue with you shaming him. And there are many people would might easily react and to war if they wound up being a platform for your writing. You shamed him and you shame others just be up front about it. And we all do this on the internet at one time or another. But you make a lifestyle out of it.
I am not trying to "shame" you into silence about Coldwell or anything, and I am not a Trudeau supporter. I would tell you my opinion of him but it would just publicly shame him and I am not interested in adding to your years of already doing that.
And I do recommend Jon Ronson's book to you. Given your chosen lifestyle.
"But to accuse critics of being self-righteous and thinking themselves without flaws is one of the main (and one of the lamest) arguments leveled against us, generally by those who have some reason to be defensive."
Why is it so lame? How is it not fair to point out the superiority of someone who is making a living of pointing out others flaws? Look what happened here when I posted: you and two others all went directly to pointing out some flaws about me to invalidate the comments I offered. It seems to be the prevailing view here that if the person making a comment is flawed then their comment is invalid. So it follows that a person must be without flaws to have any point worth expressing and I assume that you must be without flaws. So how is my argument so lame?
1. Leonard Coldwell describes HIMSELF as a "public figure" on several of his Facebook pages. As well, he is all over the Internet publicly boasting about his tremendous accomplishments, his cures of thousands of cancer patients, his numerous degrees and credentials, and so on. He is constantly bragging publicly about how he is the best-loved, most successful, most highly paid natural cures expert and motivational "coach" on the planet. He is always making videos and constantly bragging about the millions of views they have. He claims to be a mega-bestselling author of more than 19 books. He boasts of being the keynote speaker at numerous "mega" (he loves that word "mega") health expos all over the world. So he is very much a public figure in every sense of the word. Of note, "public figure" also has legal connotations, at least in the United States.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_figure
2. In the beginning I DID *merely* question Coldwell's credentials, as well as his name change, his mysterious past, the reasons he left Germany, and his more extravagant claims about his accomplishments. I also invited Coldwell to come on to my blog and tell his side of the story and answer some of my questions, but he never did. He is still welcome to do so, though. More than likely I would have stopped at just the one blog post about him, especially since for a very long time I thought of him as little more than an amusing sideshow in the Kevin Trudeau circus. But Coldwell upped the game by launching vicious attacks on me as a result of that one blog post, and I am not the type of person to just sit by and say nothing when being viciously attacked.
3. My blog is not a "lifestyle" and it is certainly not a living.
4. Your argument that I think I am some pure soul is lame because I have never written or said anything to indicate that I harbor such delusions. You came on my blog leveling accusations against me -- ANONYMOUSLY -- and yes, we were all within reason to point that out. However in arguing my points I addressed YOUR points and did not attack you, nor did I say or imply that just because you are anonymous your comment is invalid. You did in fact make a comment that had some validity, and it was the fact that we all tend to dehumanize each other. I acknowledged that. In addition, I think I am within reason to be curious about your motives for making your comments. If you in fact have no reason to be defensive and no personal reason for participating here other than just to make a point, then I apologize for seeming to assign personal motives to you. But I have no way of knowing, because I am working at the disadvantage of not knowing who you are.
And though we may agree to disagree on certain matters I do appreciate your participation, because it gets boring when everyone agrees with everyone.
"I also invited Coldwell to come on to my blog and tell his side of the story and answer some of my questions, but he never did."
This is a common and highly disingenuous of gestures where people like yourself extend invitations to people to enter your game and frame of seeing the world. No one in their right mind would ever enter such a situation where you could use them as a live platform for promoting what you do. Only an insane person would have accepted such an invitation. Unless a person is agreeing with you on the point of the whole blog, this almost always turns into a pile on, where a group shames one person. E.G. "Apparently sociopaths - as well as turds - of a feather stick together."
I leave you with my book recommendation. It will be valuable for you to read a 2015 perspective about the world of public shaming that has emerged and of which you seem to enjoy. I would gladly gift you my copy but the logistics of that do not allow for it.
Someone calling themselves a "public figure" ( as strange as that is IMO, ) does not mean anyone can now treat that person like a thing. I am not defending Coldwell, I have no clue who he is. I perceive you to be treating people like things to write about and I don't like it, sorry. Maybe they deserve it and ave it coming to them according to you, maybe they treated you or others like things and you think they got some payback coming to them, well if I was talking to them, I would say the same words, I perceive you to be treating t people like things and I don't like it.
If you are not a turd I apologize for allowing my husband to insinuate that you are one.
My opinion is that Coldwell IS insane (and a sociopath to boot) but he is also cowardly. The point is that this forum is open to him and to people who support him and agree with him. Sure, they're going to be a minority and they'll get "piled on" to a certain extent (as is the case on virtually any forum when a minority opinion enters the fray). But their voices are welcome anyway.
Coldwell on the other hand won't even allow voices of dissent on his forums at all. He blocks and deletes virtually everyone who disagrees with him. I am totally blocked from participating in any of the forums where he published the abusive and semi-pornographic screeds about me, and where he published my home address and did other things to endanger me. I was not allowed to defend myself at all. When others tried to defend me he blocked them and then accused me of harassing him under fake names.
He would have been wisest just to ignore me. But he chose to attack me in the most vicious, childish, and cowardly ways. So I fought back the only way I could: with more uncomfortable questions and facts.
Look, Anon, I get your point about treating people like "things." You may be a very kind and compassionate person, and you may very well NOT know who Coldwell is (I am really giving you the benefit of the doubt here. You did seem to know about the lawsuit so you must have some idea of who he is.). But I maintain that people who are public figures of the type that I write about are scamming, fooling, and even hurting others, and in my view they deserve to be called out on it. And that is what I do on this blog, though not very diligently of late.
Believe me, I have no desire to speak to Coldwell in person at all, but if I had the opportunity I would have no qualms about saying to his face exactly what I have written about him.
Thank you for the book recommendation. I will read it.
I probably have nothing kind to say about the person as you describe them but I also do not trust what I hear and read on the internet. It is my opinion that the web is populated by a lot of opportunists trying to capitalize on something in order to survive and have their lives make sense and contribute. I probably really would not like to find out too much about the people you critique, and I would not like what they do, for what i like or do not like is worth. But I also do not care for what you do. And you might be the funnest person at the party and nicest person to dogs and their friends that there ever was. I will probably never know. We came, we spoke and we parted having said what we wanted to say. Thanks.
And thank you. I wish you well and hope you find something more to your liking to read on the Internet.
Post a Comment