Friday, 27 December 2013

Jason Brennan. of Georgetown Uni, admits breaking Federal Law in a bid to extort money from me

Jason Brennan is an Assistant Prof at  worthwhile Jesuit Institutions. He also edits the BHL site where, acting out of pique at my criticism of his stupidity, he banned me for having used foul language or something of that sort.
I hadn't used foul language- I had however humiliated Jason by showing that his vaunted scholarship and ratiocinative power  was utterly worthless.
Jason tried to extort money from me, by impersonating a female attorney of a prestigious firm,  on the excuse of adjudicating my complaint against the BHL website.
I pointed out to him that he would go to jail if he did not apologize and make restitution before the end of December.
He has not done so. Why? He thinks he is really really smart and I'm fucking Christian and really really dumb..

Jason sent me this email
23 Dec (4 days ago)
to me
Mr Iyer,

In the spirit of Christmas, please accept my deepest apology for my childish, miscreant behavior. I will use the next few days to reflect upon my flaws, and hopefully take the first steps toward building better character. Thank you for your patience and tolerance in this matter.

All best wishes

Notice, the cunt did not sign his name to the above.

I also sent him an Email on Xmas Day, APOLOGIZING FOR ANY DISTRESS I MAY HAVE CAUSED HIM!/ Her.  ( He sometimes pretends to be a woman by the name of Debbie Dresner)

I stand by that. I put my name to it. It was genuine. I actually took out material from my blog which might reflect badly on this fucking cunt.

But, guess what? The fucker wasn't genuine. How do we know? His confession is too short. Liars keep their statements short. This cunt just doesn't want to go to Jail.

Still, there are people who make mistakes who are anxious to do something in the way of reparation so as to avoid incarceration.
Brennan is far above that.

He hasn't apologized for his prejudicial conduct on BHL- indeed,. I'm still banned there which suggests Jason has a good defense in Law against the charges I and others will be bringing against him.
Does he have an equally good defense against FEDERAL CHARGES OR EXTORTION, WIRE FRAUD AND RACKETEERING?

Time will tell.


Anonymous said...

Did you even ask him to apologize on his website? Seems to me you are acting in a most unchristian manner. You asked him to apologize, and he did. Then after the fact you thought of additional things you wanted him to do. Looks like you are in the wrong here.

windwheel said...

He didn't sign the apology. In any case, I asked him for much more than an apology and the clock is still ticking. It is the travesty of Christian language he used in a hypocritical manner that seals his fate. Confession and expiation are good things, they alter one's ethos in a positive manner. I benefit from my own confession and expiation of sin and there may be a positive externality by my doing so. This is not merely a Christian but a Universal belief. However, being fooled or coerced by an asshole carries no Ethical or Social benefit.
By the Grace of God, I am always in the wrong. That is because I'm stupid, ignorant and deeply flawed. I would scarcely write a blog, exposing myself to hatred, ridicule and contempt on a daily basis if I didn't think some hygenic function of a cathartic type were not implicit in the display of low comedy and bad taste.
Socioproctology investigates the public asshole at the moment when, Gollum like, it parts with its 'Precious'. Yes, it is unChristian to unseal the vials of one's wrath upon Gollum precisely at the moment he is at his most pathetic. Yet, Socioproctology is itself a turd uttered by an sphincterless asshole.
With Charity towards none, always keep in mind the message of Team America, World Police-
Gary Johnston: We're dicks! We're reckless, arrogant, stupid dicks. And the Film Actors Guild are pussies. And Kim Jong Il is an asshole. Pussies don't like dicks, because pussies get fucked by dicks. But dicks also fuck assholes: assholes that just want to shit on everything. Pussies may think they can deal with assholes their way. But the only thing that can fuck an asshole is a dick, with some balls. The problem with dicks is: they fuck too much or fuck when it isn't appropriate - and it takes a pussy to show them that. But sometimes, pussies can be so full of shit that they become assholes themselves... because pussies are an inch and half away from ass holes. I don't know much about this crazy, crazy world, but I do know this: If you don't let us fuck this asshole, we're going to have our dicks and pussies all covered in shit!

I myself have previously spoken of Poetry as the turd protruded by the asshole to feed the aborted children of its own absent minded rapes.
I'm not sure how exactly that fits in, but my point is that Xmas isn't just about eating and drinking a lot- it's also about taking a huge dump.
Mind it kindly.

Anonymous said...

So, he didn't sign the apology? Wasn't it obvious it came from him? Didn't he send it to you from his own email account?

Seems to me he apologized, and then you acted like a jerk, so now he's shunning you.

windwheel said...

I'm a jerk, no question.
But you probably aren't. The reason I think so is because you have referred to Christian standards of behavior.
So I value your input.
I'm now going to gas on for a bit, and, if you can stomach the task, I hope you will feel free to point out the precise points where I veer away from sanity, morality and the basic norms of Christian interpersonal conduct.
Brennan, adopting the persona of a female lawyer told me I owed him money. I got angry and fought back. Brennan dropped that pretense saying I was the troll-king, he took his hat off to me. But my original complaint was that he had acted in a public forum in a highly prejudicial manner. By saying I was a better troll than him, Brennan wasn't apologizing at all. I said 'this won't wash. I've given you till the end of December. You have both committed and confessed to a Federal crime. Our positions are not symmetric.'
Under the influence of Mike Munger's charm (Munger is also a contributor to BHL, and thus a person who could have protested, reversed, or otherwise mitigated the effects of the prejudicial action which formed the substance of my initial complaint to the BHL editors (actually Brennan).)
Munger is welcome to call me a troll. That is his honest belief and he has engaged in no criminality but shown charm and a good sense of humor in treating off me.
Now, it is absolutely true that I GAVE AN UNCONDITIONAL APOLOGY FOR ANY DISTRESS I had caused Jason. I also unilaterally withdrew a blog post which might injure him. But precisely because both actions were unilateral and based upon the notion that Jason, as an educated man and, if not a Christian, then, nevertheless, a scholar WHO TEACHES AT GEORGETOWN AND ADVERTISES HIMSELF AS SUCH who well understands what is commonly meant by the process of self-examination and reparation commonly covered under the heading of, if not the sacrament of confession, then the pragmatics of metanoia and the ethical priority of parrhesia, for someone he admits he knew was poor, black, and MENTALLY ILL, with respect to any estoppel arising out of my own warm sentiments and desire to benefit Brennan in this regard.
I will not put words into Brennan's mouth.
He is keeping it shut because he understands that that is the first law of survival for the Criminal. Keep schtum. Lawyer up.

Now it may be that Jason Brennan has turned off his Email and so didn't get my very warm Christmas Email.
Or it may be, that as you say 'he apologized, and then you acted like a jerk, so now he's shunning you.'
I don't know.
However, as a novelist, as a student of the human heart, I must tell you that had Brennan's apology been genuine, if he had in fact engaged in a metanoiac process as he promised to do- he would have been the first to email or phone me.
When we feel released from the burden of even a bungled crime against another, we smile, we are garrulous, we want to spread the joy.

windwheel said...

Now, you may say, Brennan and you are equals. You gave him a unilateral pass. Now you go back on it. You are an Indian giver. This is ungentlemanly and unchristian.
My response is; Brennan and I did not engage as equals. He claimed, and I initially conceded, his superior auctoritas, though it transpired that this was both fraudulent and involved a criminal conspiracy to extort money which, since the offence was received in England, is bound by English law.
I have in good faith apologized to Brennan for any distress I caused him. I apologize to everyone whom I've offended. I am a sinner who weeps and sighs for release from the bondage of Sin.
However, once Brennan admitted his guilt, apologized to me, and said that he was taking certain steps so as to become a better man, I gained autorictas over him in the shape of a duty to admonish and threaten till he had himself taken the proper steps to put himself out of danger of Sin and Wrongdoing.
This is a subtle point- but I make it because it strikes at the philosophical root of a particular, morally slovenly, praxeology which nevertheless has currency.
I welcome your comments.

Anonymous said...

You're right that Brennan is a sociopathic piece of shit. But there's little you can do about that. We each have to do the Christian thing, which is to forgive (even those who don't deserve it!) and move on. Remember, Christ forgave all of us, even though none of us deserve it.

You might say that Christ forgives only those who are completely and fully sorry. But--and this is a subtle point lost on most Christians--none of us are capable of being completely and fully sorry without God's grace.

The truth is, when another sinner asks for forgiveness, we sinners can't know whether that sinner is sincere or not. Only God knows. So, what we need to do is grant that forgiveness, in the image of Christ, and trust in the Lord to deal justice and mercy during the day of judgment.

windwheel said...

Well said. Not to forgive is to nurse a cancer.

Anonymous said...

If you can prove BHL did the same thing to anyone else then they can be charged under RICO- the anti-racketeering act.