Re: Donna's Statement/Comment

(*Note to random readers: This is one of those posts where the random reader wouldn't understand. This is what I meant by how things can get slightly off-topic, and my apologies for that. It really all is a shit show. You're not expected to know the past, and to be honest, it doesn't matter anyways. People are literally crazy. It's your choice to read this or not. Background information: There was a forum known as "BE"/www.benzoexodus.com, owned by Donna, who has multiple aliases. She was friends with Mike59, the "alleged" owner of www.cesspoolofmadness.com. Donna opened up another benzo self-help forum this summer (the "new" BW, www.benzowithdrawal.org), but hid her identify from mostly everyone, except Cayenne from BW, who was Inkerbelle from BB/www.benzobuddies.org. I know, all of these silly abbreviations and nicknames. Thought I'd give some background info, but don't read it if you don't want to, as you wouldn't miss much if you did not read it.)


This is my reply to Donna's comments at http://ceasefireofinsanity.blogspot.com/2012/11/is-it-weird-in-here-or-is-it-just-me.html. I will be replying tat-for-tat tat, and following the order of comments chronologically. Donna is "You" below.

You: "Aside from answering some of his dozens of emails a few weeks ago regarding what you all call the document dumps I haven’t corresponded with him for a very long time."

I don't call them dumps (bad connotation, you know?). I don't believe that you haven't corresponded
with him in a long time. I'm very sure he asked you if you were "Fortune" in the beginning and you
jokingly replied by saying that you were everywhere and dodged the question without answering it.
How do I know? Emails get forwarded. I don't think M59 would care that I said that either. He
forwarded me one or two regarding Fortune after the leaks. He does not FWD me all emails, let alone very many at all-- maybe 3 in total since January  We're not "friends" by any means. He and I had had our huge fight, so trust will never exist between us. I tend to believe him more than you because even though we're not friends, I've never back-stabbed him. Logically, he would have no reason to make this up. Even if he never sent me that email, I always thought-- "Why does the CoM attack BB and not BW?", meaning that I knew he knew, with or without any statement from him.

You: "Marie needed help learning the software. I felt good about helping them before I was to move on. Due to all that was going on and the gossip/drama surrounding my name and some of the things I participated in the past I thought it would be a good idea to keep my involvement private, thus fortune."

When I last looked, forums are usually simply unzipped and updated when needed. Things can be added as wanted, and some can be tricky. I think a person who knows a little bit about computers could manage.Marie has a PhD in Geophysics. I think anyone who can understand this

 can set up a forum and learn software. So I'd need a better reason. 

While I understand not being able to use "Donna" as a name (I couldn't use "Banana101" because it's 'muddled' as well), I can see using ONE alias, but no more. I'll get into honesty in a bit, but it goes a long way.


You: "This past week has been nothing but this current drama and I’m already sick of it. I don’t have much tolerance for things that cause upset these days."

Drama? This drama could have been avoided by being honest. You're sick of it? I imagine that you're
sick of M59's blogs about you-- I've been there. Neither of you are innocent, and while I don't 
condone his activity, I see how it can be justifiable to some extent. I.e., people become VERY upset after they've been lied to and back-stabbed. Even more-so when done by someone whom they trusted and considered a friend for years. About "tolerance and being upset": You've ran forums for years. IMO, I don't see you just walking away right now. The truth almost always comes out at some point. And there will always be drama about benzo forums, with or without you. It's something that hardly anyone understands; We've got quacks and $cios trying to "help" us, And benzo w/d/ (mainly c/t @ a high
dosage) can lead to death. There will always be drama. Of course someone was going to find out the
truth at some point. When others say "Does so and so not have a life?!", it shouldn't be taken as an
insult (I never took it as one). Maybe some people are altruistic and don't want anything in return,
except for a rational look at the whole topic of benzos. I consider myself to be that way. There
shouldn't be a "manual" or forums which recommend what you do eat or should not eat, or enable 
hypochondriacs. And as of now, they ALL do. Yes, I'm sure the majority of "us" are angry with our MDs
for a number of reasons. Some are justified, some are not. But people need MDs to figure benzo w/d as well. (If it's even necessary; I keep seeing cases where it never seems to be medically sound to get off of them.) Support is fine; it's great, actually. Enabling people with (who knows how many other) MI's is not great. People need actual doctors, not self-claimed "victims of psychiatry" to help them.

You: "Back to the new forum, one of Marie’s goals was to keep it fact based so I stuck around for a bit."

Fact based? Fortune/you said the following on May 25, 2012: "Experiencing benzo withdrawal is similar to having a severe concussion" and "When in recovery from any type of brain injury, whether functional or structural, there is no easy way through." From:
http://benzowithdrawal.org/viewtopic.php? f=22&t=47

How is this fact based? I've never heard of comparing benzo w/d to a concussion, and other
than LADER (who had his 80's CT study about benzos causing brain damage totally debunked, though he still uses this as "evidence"), where did this brain injury/damage theory come from? The following is hilarious. Lader and Ashton's grant requests were declined: (Jim Dobbin, MP, of APPGITA, thinks that benzos being prescribed longer than 2-4 weeks is a "scandal".)

Professor Lader, who chaired the MRC meeting, declined to speculate as to why the MRC declined to support his request to set up a unit to further research benzodiazepines and why they did not set up a special safety committee to look into these concerns. Professor Lader stated that he regrets not being more proactive on pursuing the issue, stating that he did not want to be labeled as the guy who pushed only issues with benzos. Professor Ashton also submitted proposals for grant-funded research using MRI, EEG, and cognitive testing in a ramdomised controlled trial to assess whether benzodiazepines have permanent damage to the brain, but similar to Professor Lader got turned down by the MRC. From: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/drugs-linked-to-brain-damage-30-years-ago-2127504.html

Yes, BNZs can easily change receptors and ion channels. We know this. There has been no evidence that this is permanent, and I'd like to know who considers receptor binding potentials an injury or damage. It's simply "changed". The brain can modify itself in many cases; this is the whole reason why people become tolerant to GABAa agonists (benzos).

And then Donna, you supported this quack, Andrew Saul, of www.doctoryourself.com.  "Tessa" showed a lovely video about Dr. Saul:
http://benzowithdrawal.org/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=225

His thoughts in the video: Sickness is a "choice"; Vitamins are great, Don't listen to your MD when they say that for most people, they're unnecessary; "We have a public that's catching on quicker than the medical profession". His POV on modern medicine: "Modern medicine has created more co-dependents even than co-pays. We’ve learned to hold out for a magic bullet, such as a new miracle drug, breakthrough surgical procedure, or new organ transplant. What rubbish. Oddly enough, we've also “learned” to discount the healing power of Nature, and the tremendous therapeutic benefit of lifestyle changes, vegetarian diet, raw 
food juices, and vitamin supplements." From http://www.doctoryourself.com/advice.html

Who is Andrew Saul, PhD? Not an MD. His PhD is in some field of nutrition  I believe. If you see his "About Me" page at http://www.doctoryourself.com/aboutme.html, you read he is the Editor-in-Chief of ORTHOMOLECULAR Medicine News Service. Do I hear ducks quacking? Indeed. If you ever read "Orthomolecular", just STOP reading and go far, far away.

As far as Marie/Cayenne wanting to keep things "fact based":
http://www.benzowithdrawal.org/viewtopic.php?p=35. Cayenne says: "For titrating medications which are not water soluble, you and your doctor may consider using Ora-Plus." The only benzo that is water soluble  is Versed. They're not handing Versed pills out in the US. Fact based my arse. Ora-Plus: *Sometimes* used by pharmacists to mix medications into liquids for children and those who cannot swallow tablets. It also can affect the thyroid, which is why it CAN be used in some cases, and SHOULD NOT be used in others. Not really meant for making benzo "titrations" at home. See http://www.amazon.com/Ora-Plus-Oral-Suspending-Vehicle-Paddock/dp/B000GGHSQM: "Ora Plus is an aqueous-based vehicle consisting of a synergistic blend of suspending agents that have a high degree of collidal activity." (YUM. And they misspell colloidal.) $30 for 16 ounces? I wouldn't spend that on good whiskey per ounce! Titration simplifies the process of benzo w/d?!? IMO, it's a tad obsessive and unless one is on Xanax and cannot switch over to Klonopin or anything else due to an allergy (I can't see how that would apply in 99% of the population). This ENTIRE LIQUID titration thing is BS.

You: "Marie wasn't yet ready to take on the software by herself." (She's not an idiot and runs her
own page/blog and I'm sure she can even code.)

"The main goal was to avoid exactly what is happening now over at Scott’s site, not for my sake 
because I was responsible for my own involvement but for Marie’s sake and the others who were giving of themselves and their time, thus the denial, etc." (Marie never distanced herself from BW. She had, maybe still perhaps has, a public Google + account which advertised it.)

"I should note that these drug withdrawal forums will never be totally free of Ashton, blame or 
advice nor will they ever be purely science based. This is just the nature of human beings and life."
(Who knows-- There might be a forum that is not "pro-Ashton" at some point. Blame? Who are we
blaming? Like I said, some can blame their MD, but most cannot. I don't see how a forum cannot be science
based at some point. You just need the right people who have access to private med data, experience, and general knowledge of cell structures. Those people are hard to find, but they exist.)

You: "The cursing out to Colin in an email was more because I was so sick and tired of his 'be 
afraid, be VERY afraid' messages and he WAS lying/libeling/speculating and instigating falsehood by presenting a fervent 'idea'. As I recall he was inferring that Mike59/Scott had something to do with the starting of the new forum and that people’s personal information was going to be compromised or some sort of nutty and ominous warning like that so he deserved to be challenged."

I disagree. Colin had every right to question it. Anyone did for that matter. Logic says: M59 isn't attacking BW, so something is going on. Colin's warnings were NOT false. Go back to April 1 @ the CoM. I was there, harassed, etc. (And I've a funny feeling that you're hands aren't exactly clean, my dear.) I hope SOMEONE would give others a warning! Colin didn't infer anything-- he questioned others. Even if he did infer, again, go back to logic that tells you M59 knew something, as he wasn't attacking BW. My personal info WAS compromised-- can you blame anyone for telling others to be wary? I can't. I don't see anything "nutty" or "ominous" about it, but that's ME. After your home's photos (inside and all) are published, your ACTUAL child (who is NOT in their 20's or 30's like  yours or M59s) is brought up, I question who the hell you think should be challenged, really. People are allowed to challenge whomever they damn well want to, of course. You challenge others all the time, and I'm not sure if you're deluding yourself into thinking that you're "winning" or not. So far, I'd say you've "won" a reputation for lying, manipulating and back-stabbing. If you want to count those as "wins", be my guest.

You: "When Drew and I were going to leave there were still a few unfinished technical aspects that needed attention on my end so, rather than let Drew carry around the fact that I was still there due to his continued ties to Scott and his inability to be completely dishonest, we just made the new admin account until I could finish up."

You could have just elevated Tessa's account. That would have taken about a minute. No need to make up a fake account. I'm sure I'm not the only one who sees this as bizarre. And again, technical stuff-- I think Marie can handle that on her own. And Drew is a big boy, too. I think he can handle his own.

You: "A few weeks ago, maybe a month ago, I got an email from Marie that someone had cracked her password and obtained some information. Whoever it was deleted the Tessa avatar so they had a specific agenda when doing what they did."

Cracked account? You blamed me, or someone named BenzoOhNo from BW, and said that person was me. If I could hack, MANY sites would have been compromised by now, believe me. I don't know anything about BW avatars or what that has to do with "their" agendas. I'm not a hacker, and neither is M59 or BB Admins/Mods. I still have ZERO proof that BE was even hacked. I'd LOVE for Marie to FWD me this email. Marie, please do. As you know, one can do "IP spoofing", and I would seriously question the validity of Donna's information. She used M59's blog to get back at former BE mods, so I'd question every damn word that comes out of her mouth if I were you. I'm not saying this because I have anything personal against her either. She has not "harmed" me, but she's tried. I really never cared nor got upset. She commented as me on pissedconsumer.com. I had NO idea I was in California. Must have been a crappy trip if I went from PA>CA in the winter and didn't enjoy the sunshine and made internet comments! The other day, M59 blogged about how Donna called you crazy on the same site in December/January. See the CoM. So, I obtain nothing by telling you this information. "Watch your back" is my advice, and I'm sure you already are. If I were to guess... Donna was THE admin, and there was no cracking involved. First of all, no one cares, and secondly, this is something Donna would make up to instill fear and doubts in you. Don't allow her to. We all know you're a LOT smarter than she is, and you've done nothing evil. The whole going along with the lying thing? It would be nice to know why, and feel free to email me. Donna would me more than happy to give you my email address or phone number, and I wouldn't mind if she did. She won't, however... Anything that becomes between she and "her things/people" are off-limits. Drew said she never gave him my phone # (I asked her to give it to him); She said he's lying. Hmm... Who do I believe? The one who hasn't lied maliciously, obviously (Drew). My guess: Donna made it look like a crack. And then blamed it on me, for whatever reason she wants to think is justifiable. I don't use proxies. I was actually on BW today to get the above links. No proxies used. IP 67.xxx.xxx. I don't use them for the CoM or BB. Colin and Mike59 will tell you the same. I don't know WHO supported CCHR/Breggin and Bliss Johns. You or her? I don't know. What I DO KNOW is that you (Marie) sent me an email after I was suspended from BB, supporting me, and you gave me a funny link which "earned" you a suspension. (By the way, Google "Go the Fuck to Sleep" by Samuel L. Jackson. It's hilarious.) Marie, you should question Donna's every move, and I'm sure you don't need to be told that.

You: "They do it, sometimes, because they think they are doing something honorable but, in the end, it just ends up hurting people and it’s also illegal so anyone attempting to do something illegal has moral issues to begin with."

There is something called Hactivism. I'm in full support of it. It is illegal? Yes. Immoral? Not always.
And illegal and immoral often have NOTHING to do with one another. Morality is merely "some set of
societal rules", and rules change over time. Wikileaks... Was it illegal for Bradley Manning to allegedly take government documents? Yes. It is immoral to imprison someone for YEARS without charging them with anything? I'd say definitely YES. But it isn't ME.

You: "Whoever did it can pat their own back for being that famous new password cracking gumshoe. All they really found out is that I was helping incognito and that Marie has only good intentions."

Cracking is easy. Port scanning is easy. I don't know who "they" are, but I'm sure they would be insulted if they read this. There are ALWAYS trails to follow, and if the trail don't go anywhere, or lead you to an empty spot, you're not dealing with a simple cracker. "Many more (leaks) to follow" sounds ominous to me, so I doubt that the above is *all* that they discovered. Who knows. I haven't received any more leaks, and for all I know, you could have sent them to me (and others). For what reason-- none sane nor logical that I can think of, but that doesn't mean much.

You: "Contrary to what people have been conditioned to think, I have no desire to attack or hurt 
people."

I haven't been conditioned to think anything-- that's the Atheist in me. All I know is that YOU commented as me and changed your Gravatar, calling me a "tweaker" and "psycho". That's not harmful? We must have different dictionaries. I actually don't care-- it didn't harm me, I laughed and it made you look like an ass. But either way you look at it, and in whichever time frame you look at it in, its intentions were not just or inexcusable. I know, you apologized, you've done "a lot of shitty things" in your life". The thing is... Someone once said that leopards don't change their spots. You had a desire then to attack/hurt me, so your accusations of libel and mudslinging done by others is a slap in the face, personally. I guess you didn't think I would do anything about that "Tweaky Psycho Banana" Gravatar thing? Guess you were wrong after you saw that I had changed it to YOUR home phone number and address. I don't play games and dislike those that do. I thought-- If she thinks she can fuck with people, thinks she is "above" others, well, I'll play "nice" and try to teach her a lesson. You had some kind of desire to hurt me via insults and childish internet games, so your above statement doesn't seem to be accurate if you ask me. More about these Gravatars and your sincere apologies soon.

You: "If I didn't want to be of service I wouldn't have opened a forum in the first place."

IMO, you had/have no business opening a forum for benzo w/d. You:
A) Took Klonopin for insomnia. Klonopin is one of the least sedative benzos, and if you knew much about benzos, you would have known that. Benzos shouldn't be used for insomnia in general. Short-term use? Fine. 90 years old and about to die? Fine. Otherwise, they should not be used for insomnia.
B) Your max dosage was 2 mgs. That's not a lot by any means (discounting Bliss Johns and other's POV's)
C) Who gets a Flumaz. detox over 2 mgs of Klonopin?!

You: "I’m obviously guilty of lying/hiding in the past. This was all so crazy and who to believe? How do I defend myself and at the same time run a website? My ego was sure flying high so I created NT because I was so pissed off at the attacks toward me. Scott didn't even know I was NT."

That's funny. I was a "Global Mod" on Baddies for a day or two if I recall. OF COURSE I looked into the database and IP addresses. I knew you were NT and Military Tanks. I didn't tell M59 nor Colin. I didn't have to tell M59. If you recall:

NT to Mike59 on Benzo Baddies @ the CoM:
"Banana having access to private info, especially mine. Not cool.
I'm out of the Baddie Project. Delete the accounts I have, k?
Keep her there if you want but take my shit off.
No prob though, whatever you decide."

Mike59's Reply to "NT":
"no donna i won't be doing the forum admin thing
making her admin was a careless mistake but not an intentional one
she knows about as much about IP as a monkey does
and doesn't know how to get around."

WEIRD. He called NT "Donna". He "knew" that you were NT. The monkey thing STILL cracks me up. Gee, if I didn't know "how to get around", why would I even have these? You didn't know me nor trust me, and didn't want the fact that you were "other people" to be known. But, again-- the truth always gets out. And REALLY? Your "ego flies high" so you create new usernames? What the...?

You: "Then Colin got himself involved in the whole thing. At first he and BB had absolutely nothing to do with all of this. Colin decided he would listen to the people who were blowing everything completely out of proportion and make everything public, including the harassment of me, L’andy and my family. I would tell Colin to just not tell his members, that they shouldn't be needlessly exposed to all of it but he kept doing it. He is also guilty of committing acts anger and revenge under the guise of him protecting his members as well as libel and blackmail. He told me that if I didn't ban Scott from BE (and BE was not his site, had nothing to do with BB) he was going to make things 'public'."

Proof? If I recall, after your cursing insult to Colin is about when he said he'd make everything public-- after you challenged him to "bring it on". That's not blackmail. No one is innocent, but all I know is that Colin removed what I wanted when I was being harassed. I don't know anyone else's story, but I do know that you gave info to M59, and M59 said this a few days ago on his blog. If I say this info got out, and a BB mod says the same, and M59 admits to you giving him info, the conclusion is in fact that you DID give out info to others. So your arguments about privacy, justice, and protection are frankly VERY moot. 

You: "Cesspool of Madness isn't what it started out to be."

I'm glad you brought this up. Gumshoe Banana went on a WHOIS dig. The outcome is shocking! To be continued... We all can handle only so much at once.

You: "I never struck out at anyone first and I am not even striking back at anyone these days."

Except me. I never did anything to you before the silly Gravatar incident. You're not doing such these days, eh? Can you tell me why you're STILL playing games with Gravatars? The last time I looked, the following were NOT there:
http://en.gravatar.com/ntisme ("NT"...Is that M59 when he was in his 20s?)
http://en.gravatar.com/yourpersonalprophet (Military Tanks... Yep, M59's driver's license photo which I "obtained via driving 16 hours, sneaking into his house, and uploading it".Oddly enough on the same site he used to host CoM images.) Lol, is this what everyone thinks? That's hilarious. Oh, and Donna, if you feel like "changing" these before anyone realizes it, too fucking bad:

 Via: http://en.gravatar.com/yourpersonalprophet; Retrieved on 12/5/2012, as clearly noted.

Via: http://en.gravatar.com/ntisme; Retrieved on 12/5/2012, again as clearly noted.


Remember this? This was back in July of this year. I guess leopards don't change their spots:

But anyways... Back to the whole "not striking out at anyone these days" topic. The above Gravatar changes seem to say the opposite. And no, I don't want a reason/excuse/what have you. Wouldn't believe it if one was offered, so don't even bother. 

You: "I don’t know much of anything about Scientology or CCHR. I never paid too close attention to any of the things being said about it. The only thing I know about Scientology is that they believe an earth species had sex with aliens and that’s what we are. I also know that Tom Cruise and John Travolta are Scientologists as well as Kirsty Alley. I also only know about what I’ve read here and there on these sites and other places in the past. I don’t really care about Scientology one way or the other because it is just another fanatical group of which I’ve read a little bit about."

Debate time. You knew. You even dug up Point of Return's associations on the CoM MONTHS ago. M59 thought this claim of yours was strange as well. See http://cesspoolofmadness.com/?p=36474. He made it a few days ago. And human/alien sex is not what they believe in. Overlord Xenu gathered everyone together for a mock census. Paralyzed them, put them in a volcano, and the volcano exploded, which left things called "thetans" floating around. These "thetans" are allegedly what causes anxiety and a whole host of other things via getting "into us", afflicting us. That's the gist of the story, I believe. Was Hubbard on acid or super high doses of amphetamines, imaginative, greedy, or just nuts? I say all of the above.

You: "If I decide to participate and/or be involved in something it really is my prerogative as to whether I decide to tell people about my activities."

It sure is your decision. However, when people harm others, their decisions, choices and freedom take a back seat, because protecting others from harm is more important than "freedom".

You: "About Baylissa, I don’t really know what she’s up to now."

I never asked about Baylissa as far as I recall. Oh-- I guess I did question BW's association to her in July. She's into calling people mentally retarded these days. I tend to stay away from anything or anyone that mentions "Light" and "Energy" unless I happen to be studying astrophysics. (No thanks. They lost me at "String Theory".)

You: "Of course none of this really means much of anything because talk is cheap and actions speak louder than words. Also, once trust is lost it must be earned back at twice the cost or more and I’m not sure I’ve touched on earning it back or if I even deem it a worthwhile endeavor at this point. I’m sure I’ve missed a lot, touched on some uninteresting points and there may be other questions that are unanswered but I can’t write all day. I've done enough blabbing today but I did do it to honor some decent people who have done absolutely nothing to hurt anyone."

Talk is cheap. Actions? IMO using my own "psychic powers" (hah), I don't see you walking away from anything. You've invested years in this, I don't see you throwing in the towel. People might have questions, but your answers are not guaranteed to be honest and true, so why bother asking them? I know I wouldn't.

Cayenne/Marie/innocence: I like her, have nothing against her (except for the woo she seems to believes in via "titration"). I do not know why she agreed with going along with the lies, what you told her, why she believed you, nor do I care. BW is "dead", and none of these forums help many people. Great, you find out that you're not alone or going crazy. But when people start telling others that benzos are POISON, as well as MSG and fluoride--  it's time to get away! That's my opinion anyways.

I'm glad you tried to "honor people" (I assume Marie and Drew) with your statement. I was questioned as to why I would allow you to make a statement by others, actually (and not by M59). My reasons: You tend to lie, I love debates, and I doubt this will be the last of "this". Being unbiased,  you also have the right to make a statement about what went on/your thoughts, etc., even if they're not true. I have always said that I liked full transparency. Any info, regardless of it's accuracy, can be useful. So that's why. I'm not mad that you lied to me about BW when we spoke in July. I'm not angry that you did the Gravatar games with my username (and now M59's) or commented as "me". It speaks volumes by itself.