Author Topic: Cataloging TheWho/John Reuben's Lies (Read 159935 times)

Troll Control · « **Reply #45 on:** November 28, 2009, 12:59:01 PM »

Quote from: "Whooter"

How do we know how desperate someone is...?

I guess we can tell by their style, delivery and provision of facts to back up their points. Based on those fair criteria, it seems the OP is very calm, deliberate and points out many verifiable untruths in TheWho's story. It also seems TheWho is quite desperate to dispell the story but he was shown to be lying about quite a few important things in this thread that he was denying very desperately only to be caught by his own posts admitting to the same facts he was denying. So, from an uninterested third party POV, it looks like Whooter is desperate, but his desperation doesn't square with his tight withholding of all "evidence" that could be used to clear him. All he needs to do is own his guest posts to prove he's honest and worth looking into further. If he won't be transparent and have all of his posts linked, it lends to the charges of the already proven dishonesty.

So I guess we need his posts linked up or we need his old account restored from backup and all of his activity and PMs opened to the public (as Whooter already said he would allow). If he's unwilling to do these things we can safely assume he's lying. Think about it, if you were a murder suspect and you claimed to have the evidence to prove you didn't do it, but refused to let anyone see it, who believe you? Nobody. Remember how TheWho played this game with RobertBruce, saying that if RB refused to have his posts linked that everyone would know he's lying? Well, same standard here. Either TheWho links all of his posts and publishes all of his PMs from a restore of his old account or he's a liar. Plain and simple. By his own standards.

Anonymous · « **Reply #46 on:** November 28, 2009, 02:32:38 PM »

Whooter, that last post was just silly. Regardless of whether or not your posts are linked, it's well-established that you're a liar. The issue here is whether or not the Concerned Parent pm is legit. If it's legit, then your lying is linked directly to Aspen and STICC.

Whooter · « **Reply #47 on:** November 28, 2009, 04:20:16 PM »

Quote from: "Guest"

Whooter, that last post was just silly. Regardless of whether or not your posts are linked, it's well-established that you're a liar. The issue here is whether or not the Concerned Parent pm is legit. If it's legit, then your lying is linked directly to Aspen and STICC.

This is true and if Concerned Parent doesn’t authenticate the PM then we all witness the sad reality of the depths posters on fornits are willing to go to discredit a program or another person. It will throw into question the accuracy of all accounts written here and cause us to second guess the sincerity each time someone shares their experience of their time in a program going forward.

Anonymous · « **Reply #48 on:** November 28, 2009, 05:07:55 PM »

Nope. We're not witness to anything like that. We just lack the conclusive evidence that confirms what is already highly likely given your persistent efforts to deny that you're John D. Reuben and your occasional unverifiable claim that John D. Reuben does not post here. Cui bono? Going forward, of course.

Whooter · « **Reply #49 on:** November 28, 2009, 05:17:09 PM »

Quote from: "Guest"

Nope. We're not witness to anything like that. We just lack the conclusive evidence that confirms what is already highly likely given your persistent efforts to deny that you're John D. Reuben and your occasional unverifiable claim that John D. Reuben does not post here. Cui bono? Going forward, of course.

I have been reading along and I have to pipe in and say that if the PM is found to be fake then it doesnt mean that this thewho guy isnt Rueben but it does show that posters here are willing to lie and make up stories to discredit programs and other posters.

Anonymous · « **Reply #50 on:** November 28, 2009, 05:36:21 PM »

Nope. Doesn't show that either. Whooter is already totally discredited, as is Reuben, as is Aspen, and as is STICC. Whooter already pretended that the comment alleged that he was Concernred Parent, which was not the case at all. Reuben uses his dead kid to sell STICC, STICC sells Aspen, and Aspen kills kids.

Whooter · « **Reply #51 on:** November 28, 2009, 05:44:03 PM »

Quote from: "Guest"

Nope. Doesn't show that either. Whooter is already totally discredited, as is Reuben, as is Aspen, and as is STICC. Whooter already pretended that the comment alleged that he was Concernred Parent, which was not the case at all. Reuben uses his dead kid to sell STICC, STICC sells Aspen, and Aspen kills kids.

He is totally discredited that for sure. Now we are waiting to see if the person posting as "Concerned Parent" fabricated the PM linking TheWho to Reuben via email. We are all waiting for that to be exposed.

Anonymous · « **Reply #52 on:** November 28, 2009, 05:58:32 PM »

Wrong again. We don't know if the person claiming to have posted as Concerned Parent ever did so. So we don't know if the claim that Reuben's email address was sent by the Who came from the person who posted as Concerned Parent, or someone claiming to be that person. Interesting that Whooter's behaviour is so odious that he acknowledges that it discredits anyone and anything proven to be tied to it.

Whooter · « **Reply #53 on:** November 28, 2009, 06:09:51 PM »

Quote from: "Guest"

A PM sent by TheWho to me when he thought I wanted to send my son to ASR:

Quote
Re: Is ASR a good program?
Sent: Fri Jun 06, 2007 1:07 pm
From: TheWho
To: Concerned Parent

Personally I think ASR is a good program. It worked for our family. My kid was there

when Dave Marcus wrote his book based on the kids in the program and they got back on

track and matured. I have been to the campus many times and think if it's a good fit

for your son that you shouldn't worry about it. Don't trust what you read on this site

because the members here are all anti-program and have an agenda to discredit all

programs. If you want to contact me outside fornits I can help you get in contact with

someone who can help you make the right decision. You can email me at

[email protected] was offered by Whooter as a contact to talk outside of Fornits. How could John Reuben login as TheWho and send PMs to me as TheWho? Did Reuben break into TheWho's Fornits account? Or is it more sensible that John Reuben and TheWho are the same person? Obviously they are.

Then Whooter says this:

Quote
As far as the email goes that could have been anyone. How do you know [email protected] is thewho? You never established this.

Well, yes, I did. You PMed me the address. And now I looked up the address to see if it was used anywhere else. And it was! Both on a struggling-parent type bulletin board where it was linking to STICC and also on the whois report for the STICC website. Coincidence? Hardly.
This is the smoking gun. If this PM can be authenticated then TheWho and Reuben can be linked via email. If it is not then the poster fabricated the PM.

Whooter · « **Reply #54 on:** November 28, 2009, 06:41:03 PM »

Psy said he would be willing to authenicate the PM. We are just waiting for Bruce, I mean "Concerned Parent" to contact Psy. I am sure if the whole thing was made up we will know shortly because Bruce will not have anything to authorize...... We may have to call this "BruceGate". Tick...Tick...Tick.

Troll Control · « **Reply #55 on:** November 28, 2009, 07:01:39 PM »

Nope. We're just waiting for TheWho to have all of his posts strung together and his account restored from backup so we can see all of his PMs firsthand. He seems pretty desperate to shift the focus off him on to "RobertBruce" as usual, the only problem being this thread has nothing to do with RobertBruce. I guess not so coincidentally, TheWho has also already admitted to creating a false "RobertBruce" login account and posing as RobertBruce. Not long ago, TheWho was claiming he and RobertBruce were one in the same. He lies so much you can't believe anything he says. So I don't think the burden of proof for anything is on anyone other than TheWho. If he wasn't hiding anything, he'd be getting his posts linked and his account restored so we can see the contents of his PMs. If he doesn't do it, then he's hiding things he doesn't want anyone to know. It's really that simple. Imagine if he was accused of a crime and he had evidence to absolve himself, but he claimed someone else had to produce it. Who would believe him? What if he was selling you a car, but refused to show you the title? You wouldn't believe him. No, this time he'll have to put up or shut up. Let's get those posts linked together and we'll see who's been doing all the lying.

Anonymous · « **Reply #56 on:** November 28, 2009, 07:08:36 PM »

Whooter, it doesn't prove that the PM was fabricated if the PM can't be authenticated.

Troll Control · « **Reply #57 on:** November 28, 2009, 07:12:09 PM »

I agree with some of the other posters. Read this string. It starts with this guy TheWho denying he ever went to Chicago for a TTI meeting and denying he's connected to the industry in any way other than being just a parent of a program kid.

Then he was quoted showing in his own words he DID go to Chicago for a TTI meeting and that he's on a comittee to assess the safety of TBSs. So he was proven lying about two things he denied strongly, even saying that the claims were bogus until Psy could verify he posted from Chicago, the same MO he's using now, trying to get Psy to fight his battles, but not giving Psy the permission to link his posts. See what I mean? He's the one making a claim, but he won't back up the claim with evidence.

Anyway, let's say this string is three counts of lying against TheWho. The first two he denied, then copped to when he couldn't lie any more and was caught and the third he's denying as he did the others, but it was already proven, so he's really just having a hissy fit that he was exposed. When you get caught lying so many times you lose credibility, so TheWho is the one who needs to prove he's not lying because all of the pieces fit that he IS lying.

Whooter · « **Reply #58 on:** November 28, 2009, 07:13:12 PM »

Quote from: "Guest"

Psy said he would be willing to authenicate the PM. We are just waiting for Bruce, I mean "Concerned Parent" to contact Psy. I am sure if the whole thing was made up we will know shortly because Bruce will not have anything to authorize...... We may have to call this "BruceGate". Tick...Tick...Tick.

He said he could authenticate it as a 3rd party. This could also be done by Ursus also if Concerned Parent wanted.

Anonymous · « **Reply #59 on:** November 28, 2009, 07:19:02 PM »

TheWho does not need to prove he's not lying. It is assumed that he is lying, as he has repeatedly lied in the past, and it would be in John D. Reuben's interest to lie in denying that he is Whooter. The only way for Whooter to prove that he is not John D. Reuben, would be for him to prove that he is someone other than John D. Reuben. The issue is whether it can be proven that he is lying about this specific issue, for which there is ample circumstantial evidence that he is indeed lying.

Fornits
Fornits Home for Wayward Web Fora
An open discussion about the troubled parent industry