HOW ONLINE STUPIDITY CAN GET YOU IN BIG BIG TROUBLE!

REVENGE OF THE SPAM
Gregory Steven Hart lives behind black metal gates in a house full of computers, elegant sculptures and expensive liquor that he never drinks.

Three days after Christmas, Deputy Sheriff Russell Hemmendinger hauled Hart to jail. The charges were driving with a suspended license and resisting arrest. The deputy took him down in the driveway of his $367,000 Lutz home, in front of his pregnant wife and neighbors.

Hart posted bail and went home and got to work. Within 24 hours, the first concerned citizen e-mailed the Pasco County Sheriff's Office.

From: tom and ray

To: dtobin@pascosheriff.org

Subject: Is Officer R. Hemmendinger Gay?

Has Officer R. Hemmendinger ever had sex with a boy that's under the age of 16?

*****

Hart is 43, a database developer for a massive health care corporation called Baxter International. He has a clean record, aside from nearly two dozen traffic tickets - mostly for speeding and running red lights - in the past decade. These led to the license suspension, which led Hemmendinger to his doorstep.

Hemmendinger is 31, married, a Pasco deputy for three years. His record is spotless. Citizens have written the agency to commend him for good work.

Hart claims that during the arrest Hemmendinger "started screaming and yelling hysterically at me ... like a lunatic." He returned from jail and began digging. He says his research convinced him that Hemmendinger was a homosexual pedophile.

A reporter pressed him for evidence.

"I can't go into detail," he said.

Did he report the supposed transgression to the Sheriff's Office?

No. He says couldn't trust them to investigate.

Hart had another idea. He has his own software company, Database Engineers, as well as a computer armed with a program called Atomic Mail Sender and a list of addresses known to accept spam.

Hundreds, perhaps thousands of e-mails screamed into cyberspace:

Who is Pasco Sherriff Officer R. Hemmendinger?

How is he a suspect as a child molester?

Is he homosexual?

Does he have sex with boys under the age of 16? Regularly?

Contact the Pasco County Public Information Director ...

Demand to accept ONLY the truth!

*****

One of these e-mails reached Pasco Deputy Eric Pfenninger, who alerted Hemmendinger, who reeled with disbelief. The e-mail led to two sites, Hemmendinger.net and Hemmendinger.org, at least one of which advertised an upcoming gay dating service called Hemmendinger Homosexual Haven.

Hemmendinger plugged the name into an online service that lists the owners of Web domains. The answer came back: Database Engineers Inc. The sole officer was Gregory Hart.

Hemmendinger notified his superiors and denied the allegations. Meanwhile, the Public Information Office took more than a dozen phone calls and nearly 70 e-mails from citizens.

The public-information officers told the citizens it appeared to be the work of a malcontent bent on vengeance. The agency did not conduct an internal-affairs investigation. Public Information Director Kevin Doll said there was no evidence with which to start one.

On Jan. 12, Hemmendinger filed a lawsuit accusing Hart of defaming his good name. The suit is pending in circuit court. Libel experts say Hemmendinger may have a strong case.

Here are two of Hart's defenses:

1. "I haven't made a statement. I asked a question."

Jurors may see through that, said Dale Herbeck, who teaches communication law at Boston College. "This is kind of like asking, 'When did you stop beating your wife?' "

2. He didn't personally send the e-mails - his corporation did.

"Nonsense", said Clark Furlow, who teaches corporation law at Stetson University College of Law.

"If I'm driving a car and I run you down in the street, I'm liable. The fact that I'm driving for a company doesn't change anything."

ORIGINAL

Should Victims Embrace Docile Victimhood? Or Fight Back?

For all victims & those who tell them to "get over it" and "move on":


by writer Kathy Kracjo

I am death on people telling the victim that it's a sin to fight back. They are pressuring the victim to do the very thing that causes victims to suffer terrible shame in the aftermath of abuse -- give themselves up to it.

That shame we feel at doing so is an infallible indicator that it's wrong. No one needs a book or a preacher to tell them what's right and wrong. We KNOW that's wrong. Deep down inside we feel how wrong it is to give ourselves up to abuse. Doing so makes us feel like a worm. A doormat. We know it's lack of backbone. We sense the prostitution in it. We feel utterly degraded by it.

The only excuse for it is being subjected to overwhelming force so that we haven't the power to resist. Which is rape. Which is why we feel deeply violated by it. Whether it's sexual rape or any other kind.

So, we know that we must resist when we can. If only for the sake of our self respect.

And anyone who tells us that we shouldn't fight the aggressor might as well order us to be a self masochist who injures himself.

They are pressuring the victim to prostitute themselves to abuse. How degrading! They are pressuring the victim to do what causes a human being unbearable shame. How cruel! They are pressuring the victim to do what goes against the laws of nature, our instinct for self preservation. They are pressuring the victim to commit the worst breech of faith, the worst betrayal, there is -- treason against your very self by delivering yourself up to abuse.

That's what Joan of Arc called it -- "treason," "wretched treason." She preferred the stake.

If it would be wrong to surrender another person for abuse, why should it be right to surrender yourself to abuse?

Trying to force the victim to do that is what the narcissist does! It's bad enough to abuse someone, but when you become so sadistic that you make them bend over for it on top of it all, you have crossed the line into extreme perversity, the Sin of Sodom.

Docile victimhood is NOT a virtue, and people who think it is are devoid of moral sense. They are people who don't think about what they say any more than a parrot does. Nothing proves that easier than to just then ask them, "Well what if the abuse happenes to be sexual rape? Do you say the victim should bend over for it?"

Certainly not! These are the same folks who would say that a woman who bent over for it liked it and was a whore. They would say she must fight tooth and nail.

And that's just as stupid, because sometimes she doesn't dare fight. If she did, she'd get killed.

There are few ways that the victim of narcissistic abuse can fight back, especially when the victim is a child.

And whenever the victim does find a way to put up a resistance, there is always some holier-than-thou around to tell him or her that it's a sin.

You can't do that to people. That puts them in an impossible situation. That's what breaks minds.

Horrifying example. A kid is getting bullied at school. He periodically gets his head flushed in a toilet, while the "innocent" bystanders watch and laugh. He gets his lunch money stolen daily.

Now, would you willingly walk into a place where you know that someone is waiting for you to abuse you? Of course not. But we expect him to. So, when he skips school, he gets punished. We thus force him to present himself there daily for abuse. If he doesn't it's a sin.

So he punches the bully. Oh-oh. Now he committed another sin. He gets punished for that too, because "violence" (which force used in self defense ain't) is a sin.

So, he resorts to the last resort, the really stupid thing: he tells the counsellors about the abuse. They have "a talk" with the bully. Now the bully punishes him for that by escalating the abuse.

What is that kid going to do? We are forcing him to offer himself up for abuse like a sacrificial vicitm every single day.

Something's gotta give. He will decide to kill himself, and he may well decide to take others with him.

You can't force people to docilely submit to abuse. That's the most odious thing you can do to a human being. You are subjecting him to a slavery more odious and profound than that of the slaves, a kind of slavery we haven't seen since the macabre executions of the Middle Ages = slavery as someone else's property for the purpose of vicitimization.

Indeed, the victim isn't his own property if you deny his free will to the the extent that you deny him the right even to self preservation.

Those who think the Bible demands this had better re-read it. And study what the scholars have found and Church authorities have admitted -- how long after the events it was written, whom it was really written by, and how much it's been edited and added to since.

And applying a little common sense doesn't hurt either. For example, if Jesus thought defending yourself is a sin, why does scripture mention in several places that the apostles were armed? Duh, they were his bodyguards. And of course he told the three of them with him to put up their swords when he was captured -- because they were vastly outnumbered and just would have gotten killed. Interpreting that action as some sort of general prohibition again the use the use of force is absurd.

Common sense, common sense, common sense. There is nothing more dangerous than words of scripture in a mouth with its brain turned off.

Very often the victim can't fight back. At least not without that resistence resulting in greater harm to himself. But whenever he can, he has every right to. Indeed, the only morality a bully knows is a punch in the nose. It does work.

And the victims of a narcissist's abuse through character asssination have every right to accuse their accuser, to point the accusing finger right back at the narcissist to show that it's all projection. That's the victim's only defense! He or she should not be treated as though they are the attacker.

Character assassination is not nothing. It is character ASSASSINATION. I call it the abuse that keeps on abusing for the rest of that person's life. A crime in progress for the rest of that person's life, because that bad reputation pursues and continually damages the victim for the rest of their life. The victim has every right to defend himself from this ongoing abuse in whatever way he can.

SOURCE

NOTE: When other website owners find the need to participate in a smear campaign about a victim of someone else on their site -- members need to think twice. Especially support & recovery sites.

Especially when they elevate that predator to special status. How hateful.

Now ask yourself, why is it SO IMPORTANT to smear and attack someone for speaking their truth? If it really was all B.S. you'd let things stand because it would be so important. And to those who fall away because they are afraid to still be friends with the victims? Shame on you.

Innocence seldom utters outraged shrieks. Guilt does.
~ Whittaker Chambers

Woman Thinks Boyfriend is Still Browsing Online Dating Sites

Dear Harriette:
I'm in a committed relationship with a guy I met on a dating Web site seven months ago. Things between us are good, but I have a feeling he's still "fishing" on the same Web site and I don't know how to ask him about it. When he suggested we become exclusive, I told him I wanted us to remove our profiles since we weren't going to see other people any longer. He agreed, but never took his profile off.

I didn't let it bother me at first because he never gave me a reason not to trust him. Lately however, I noticed that he goes on the site every few days. He says he's a "one-woman type of guy" and doesn't want to date anyone else.

But I don't trust him. How can I ask him if he is still looking, without sounding too accusing and psychotic? I'd have to admit that I check his profile, and that does not look too good. How I can resolve this without scaring him away?

Tati, Dallas, Texas
******
Tati:

Before you start feeling "too accusing and psychotic," come clean with him. Sit down with your boyfriend and admit what you have discovered and how you learned it. Explain to him that you had an inkling that he might not have "taken himself off the market," and, trusting your instincts, you checked.

Lo and behold, you discovered he had not done what he had agreed to do with you, namely take his profile off the dating site. Ask him why he has chosen to remain "out there" and available. Without threatening, probe to learn what he's thinking.

Tell him you enjoy his company and would like to believe what he says, that he doesn't want to date anyone else, but that his actions say otherwise. His response will cue you into your next steps.

Truth be told, his behavior already has told you what you need to know.

http://www.harriettecole.com

(EOPC's response: First, you met him Online and now you say you are in a COMMITTED relationship? Can't be very committed if you don't trust him.

Second, you had every right to check on his online activities. If he gets angry - we wouldn't be worried about scaring him away. Frankly, we would put his butt right back on the curb.

And try another route to meeting someone. NO MORE ONLINE DATING. Volunteer, work on YOU. The chances of meeting a decent person online and not a predator by our estimates? 1000 to 1.

Our gut says, honey - you got a Player! Let him go play somewhere else!)