Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen
I guess Doctor’s Data wants to use a kinder, gentler approach then I do. They gave Stephen Barrett sixty (60) days, instead of twenty-one (21) to respond to the Federal lawsuit they filed against him. The sixty day period started on June 29th, 2010 so Barrett’s answer is not due until August 30th, 2010. I’ll connect you to a Court Document about this in a minute.
And here I hoped that, by then, the “Collection Phase,” against Barrett, et al, would be in full swing. I was hoping to bid on his belongings. I could have set up a website selling “Barrett Souvenirs.” Just think, you may have been able to buy original Barrett papers to use to line your cat box – or some other equally appropriate use.
But, I guess all this is going to take much longer.
What they, Doctor’s Data’s legal team, did, was to send Barrett a letter, asking him to accept legal service of the lawsuit by mail instead of by process server. In exchange they would allow him 60 days to respond, instead of the mandatory 21 days after process. Barrett signed the agreement thereby giving him more time.
But, what is TERRIBLY important, and what I want you to look at carefully, is Barrett’s printed name, and his signature, on the agreement. It is clear that he is shaking nearly uncontrollably.
Here are the questions: (1) “Does this look like the signature of a man who is ready to go to Court and fight for his pseudo-professional life?, (2) Does this look like the signature of a man who will soon be facing 16 hours (minimum) of Deposition at the hands of Doctor’s Data’s attorneys?” On video tape? With me posting selected parts of that video on the internet?
Boy, I’m beginning to like this situation more and more…
Some other interesting things are happening…
Barrett’s support network is in a literal panic. Below is one of the reasons why.
Heidi Stevenson, who I have not yet met, has stolen from me, I hope just temporarily, the“Most Hated in Quackpot Land” spot. Heidi, a Homeopath, writes for a website called http://gaia-health.com.
Heidi’s excellent article, called simply “Quackbusters Are Busted,” can be read athttp://gaia-health.com/articles251/000277-quackbusters-are-busted.shtml.
In essence, Heidi talks about Stephen Barrett, and she is not flattering to him. To me, once I read the article (and she uses excellent resources), I thought the article to be a nice piece, very well written, and well thought out. What I did not expect was the OVER-THE-TOP-HATE-REACTION from Barrett’s minions. They tried everything to belittle and intimidate Heidi, and/or get Heidi’s article removed from the internet.
But Heidi stands her ground.
The quackpots are so upset that “Orac the Nipple Ripper,” who is apparently trying very hard to be Barrett’s replacement (Barrett is shaking himself to pieces) wrote a lengthy whine article JUST about Heidi’s article.
Heidi had to shut down the comments section for her article, after the “hatred” brigade showed up.
Barrett’s Support Network…
For the most part, in this backup effort for Barrett, the minions maintain anonymity, and I am not surprised – for those that do identify themselves, or get identified, show good reason to want to hide behind a pseudonym. I’ll give you an example below.
The attack on Heidi’s article, in her comments section, is full of pseudonyms making nasty remarks. Heidi deleted most of the worst ones already. I have encouraged her to write a second article JUST about the attacks, quoting these people, so her readers can get a sense of what Barrett, and his support network, ARE REALLY ALL ABOUT.
I have, for your reading pleasure, a sample of one of Barrett’s TOP lower level supporters. My guess is that this guy is about as good as it gets in quackbuster land. Frankly, he like the others, would have been better off remaining anonymous. You’ll see why shortly.
Here he is. He was amazingly easy to find – for he advertises his self-published “books” (go ahead and read one of his intros – and laugh) on the internet. You can go here to get a glimpse of what I think is the TYPICAL Barrett supporter. Heidi had to delete most of his posts.
His name is David N. Brown. He claims to have a degree from a University in Arizona, and he claims to be now attending Denver Seminary. He also claims to be an adult with Asperger’s Syndrome. He also claims to be writing a paper on autism.
Apparently he is unaware that Barrett, and his top echelon, are all atheists (secular humanists) and deride people who embrace religion or believe in God.
Below I have a copy of part of an email that young David (he looks about twelve) sent to the Administrator of Heidi’s website. And, yes, that is all his spelling and grammar.
“I am writing to demand the deletion of the following article:
“This article uses as a source Tim Bolen, a spammer widely regarded as dishonest and delusional. Bolen has triggered numerous lawsuits against himself and others in the course of dubious “reporting” against Stphen Barrett. Currently, he is interfering in the case of DDI v. Stephen Barrett, by threatening supporters of Barret with being sued by DDI if we speak in or donate to his defense, in a manner which I believe constitutes legal misconduct relative to the proceedings in progress.
I have confronted he author of the article with the worthlessness of Bolen as a source, and his misconduct in this particular case. She has denigrated these concerns, in the process indicating limited knowledge of an interest in what Barrett can prove or content about himself. Far more seriously, Bolen himself has appeared to continue the same threats I have warned against, as in the following comment: “Did this David Brown, who appears to be about sixteen years old, ever give you an indication where he might have parked his `nine pages?’ I will be glad to pass his “published” statements on to Doctor’s Data’s legal team so that they can “discuss” his statements in a more structured environment – like a Summons after a `Second Amended Complaint…’ “
For the most part, according to the information I get, most of Barrett’s lower level support comes from the “skeptic” organization which seems to be headed up by James Randi, the self-styled “Amazing Randi.” To get into right picture about Randi read the clip below from the Toronto Star:
February 11, 1996, Toronto Star: “What I had hesitated to mention is that the colorful Randi has been involved in a number of lawsuits. Part of the evidence brought against Randi was a tape of his telephone conversations, of explicit sexual content, with teenage boys. Randi has at different times claimed that the tape was a hoax made by his enemies to blackmail him, that he made the tape himself, and that the police asked him to make it. Whichever version is true, it’s amazing indeed that such a person could be taken seriously as a scientific adviser in an organization dedicated to denying claims of child sexual abuse.” This tape was played during a trial in which Randi was accused by Eldon Byrd, a good friend of Uri and a former Naval Surface Weapons Center researcher, of defamation by claiming he was known pedophile. True or not, during the trial Byrd and his team played a tape on which Randi was speaking to a small boy about sex and how much it would cost. Randi claimed it was all a setup by Byrd and the boys on the tape were prank callers. The judge wasn’t so sure about that, especially because Randi voluntarily called back one of the boys after the latter told him his money was running out.” To read the whole piece, click here.
Skepticism is the excuse mediocre people use to define why they do not accomplish anything themselves, and why, according to them, no one else does either.
Skeptics, as a group, would fit right in in a Barrett style organization. The definition of a skeptic in the title above, of course, also fits Stephen Barrett perfectly…
Tim Bolen – Consumer Advocate