banner image

Genesis, Page 9

I am pretty much going to let Leah speak for herself here. I had some questions about the old Survivors group and she kindly answered them. I think much of it is relevant, so I reproduce it here, with her permission, of course.

Leah PM 1

Note: A nice sample of Jack Sparrows is here.

And I would have banned Camille for doing the blocking thing. They were much more patient with her than they should have been. Camille was determined to say whatever she wished with nobody having the ability to stop her (and furthermore, she wished to prevent the moderation team from even seeing what she was writing) - in a forum she didn't own. Yet if anyone even hinted at disagreeing with her, she demanded their heads roll immediately.

Leah PM 2

The highlighted sentences are important. This is how I even knew that Brenda Bough and Kim Bumhammer existed in the first place. I was given a heads up that they might be fakes because Leah and Nancy were familiar with them.

So what we have here is Camille, who left the group a long time before it disbanded and didn't have anything at all to do with it after that, only she did because she kept trying to join under fake profiles. And we know for certain that Camille was Brenda Bough.

We also know that the fake Brenda (Camille) had a nice chat with the fake Kim about the fake mother with the fake cancer. So either Camille is also Kim or Camille knows exactly who Kim is - and both of them tried to join the Survivor group.

Leah PM 3 Leah PM 4

The Fake Attorney and The Wizard of Boz for more information.

Leah PM 5

Note: it's not the concept of somebody talking to an imaginary person that bothers atheists. What bothers us is when it's said in a condescending tone as though somehow the person is going to tell on us, or the person has some sort of connection with people in high places and we are just insignificant. Tone and intent are everything.

And in closing, there is this from the Pricky Dick himself.

Dan Keller

So, a "normal person" would have "laughed at this." Is that right?

When Alex de Barros hinted that he might know something, a vague completely-unspecified something, about Grant Lewis, Camille went totally apeshit and began demanding that Alex's comment be taken down and the entire thread removed and Alex banned. Right. Now. Do. It. Now.

And years later, she was still bitching about the "abuse" she suffered because Leah didn't remove the Alex stuff fast enough to suit her.

All because of a vague, totally non-specific hint of a claim about Grant.

On the other hand, Leah Hayes lives and works in Greenville, and her job requires that people have a certain measure of trust in her (she doesn't work at Walmart). Greenville has a relatively high percentage of former BJU students, way more, say, than Lexington, Kentucky. Imagine being Leah for the last three years. She had no way of knowing who had followed all that controversy, who had read the stuff about mental illness and empty chairs and medical records leaked from Barge. So every time she ran into somebody from BJU that she thought might be active online, she wondered. "Have they read it? Do they think I'm crazy?" She couldn't just walk up to them and say, "Hi, there, Fred. Good to see you. By the way, I'm not crazy."

If the Queen reacted like she did over a silly, nothing comment like the one Alex made, what would she do if I told the world that I know something very specific about her and Grant, about their personal life? Something inflammatory and potentially devastating?

All I'm waiting for is a little more proof.

Are you laughing, Camille? How about you, Dan? Laughing yet?