By Heidi Hutchinson
In response to the article Why I allow criticism of Barbara Bouchey on Frank Report and some criticism of her by the Retard, Frank Parlato wrote, “Retard was not part of the fight. Barb was and victory is for celebration and not for telling yourself you have PTSD ad nauseam.”
What a cop out, Frank! You know damn well it’s not about Barb (or anyone with or without PTSD) beating HERSELF up. When has Barb ever done that, publicly?
It’s about Frank Report allowing “Retard” — someone who, much to his obvious chagrin, can take no credit in any “victory,” or impart any knowledge, or understanding, or any entertaining, insightful anecdotes — to constantly verbally abuse others — especially those who CAN and DO offer real value here — and are therefore the greatest threat to “Retard” — on your site.
“Retard” has NO redeeming value, makes no salient, original points, as you claim. What? When?
No, “Retard” ONLY regurgitates, reduces others thoughts and ideas down to their crudest, ugliest, most offensive form.
Most offensively, “Retard” flagrantly LIES and blatantly misinforms. Talk about “rewriting history.”
Most often, “Retard” distorts [its] victim’s words or position, as casually as [it] also distorts facts, to make [it’s] putrid arguments.
“Retard” does not encourage “robust debate,” as you say, Frank. “Retard” does not merely strongly disagree. “Retard” insists on having the last word, chiefly using insults but sometimes even flattery — whatever works — to bully its victims away from contradicting it, to deflect and discourage discourse. “Retard” cannot stand “debate,” to be opposed. “Retard” is a very bad loser. And a loser, it is.
“Retard,” “Bangkok,” “Toots,” “Emoji Troll,” “Smiley,” “Scott (Tex) Johnson” (IMO) and all the other alias’ it uses, is a toxic, possibly dangerously disassociated soul with clear, severe, malicious gender identification issues whom you previously promised to curtail, but have permitted to, once again, overtake Frank Report like a plague. It may not get many hits on its gratefully segregated “Bangkok” etc. posts, but it permeates the comments section, nonetheless, under its many alias.
I was hoping you’d say you’ve been too busy to control it rather than defend it as you are now.
But before I sign off, as so many other Frank Rerport commenters and contributors have done due to this unchecked, cancerous invader and, now, your reneging on your promise to contain rather than propagate it, perhaps you can offer a more honest answer to explain your attachment to “Retard,” etc.?
I do believe you and your so-called Trump chump “friends’,” such as Roger Stone, devotion to POTUS and his offensive (to many) ways — including his verbal abusiveness and personal attacks on Twitter, Social Media — is part of why you defend and pretend this type of narcissistic bully behavior has little if any impact on individuals or society. Why, a good insult, you say, even brightens your day.
Yet, in truth, last time we spoke on the phone about Scott Johnson after I’d read another of his insults toward YOU, you were SEETHING with anger toward him and reiterated that you thought of him as an “asshole” and said you wished you could shut him down but know he’ll come back using alias’ with a vengeance.
In fact, verbal and emotional abuse contributes to causing disassociative orders, mental breakdown and social violence. In fact, KAR, Salzman, Bronfman and their minions relied on some of these same techniques themselves to emotionally breakdown and mentally control their victims, who then, in turn, victimized and suborned others with the same, despicable methods.
Boggles my mind as to why else, Frank, when you have worked so long and hard — and nearly singlehandedly in the final stages — to rid society of a toxic, malignant, narcissist like KAR, you would condone one like Scott Johnson, “Retard” whatever etc. right under your nose on your own blog?
Perhaps restraining orders are in order if retaliation against you or your readers is the issue as you HAVE told me. After all, Twitter had to ban Scott Johnson and his alias to protect themselves and their site users from his abusiveness.
Frank Parlato response:
I agree with much of the above. Retard lacks manners and, because Retard is anonymous, It has the courage to be rude. Yet Retard serves a function – as a devil’s advocate. If only Retard had manners, It might be persuasive.
Heidi writes that “Retard,” “Bangkok,” “Toots,” “Emoji Troll,” “Smiley,” and “Scott (Tex) Johnson” (IMO) are one and the same.
I doubt that Retard is Scott Johnson. I think that Retard and Bangkok are the same. I don’t know about the rest.
Frank Report allows anonymous comments – and many of my best leads came from anonymous comments. Some of them bore fruit as I later saw in charges against Keith Raniere and company.
To have eliminated all anonymous comments would have crippled the Frank Report and its investigative work in the beginning.
It is the fact that people – dumb and smart – lying and truthful – can submit just about anything and leave it to me to vet – which has been a tremendous boon to the investigative work of the Frank Report.
Of course, it has its downside. Assholes sometimes take over. Nice people like Heidi are sometimes offended. Sensitive people like Barb get their feelings hurt by allowing an open forum.
Over the years, there have been only a few who dared to comment in their own name on Frank Report: Toni Natalie, Susan Dones, Barbara Bouchey, Joe O’Hara, Heidi Hutchinson, Angela Ucci, Christine Marie, and a few others, among the actual fighters of Nxivm.
Scott Johnson is one of the few non-Nxivm combatants who posts comments in his own name and I am thankful to him for that. I wish more would do that.
Heidi wrote that the “last time we spoke on the phone about Scott Johnson after I’d read another of his insults toward YOU, you were SEETHING with anger toward him and reiterated that you thought of him as an ‘asshole’ and said you wished you could shut him down but know he’ll come back using alias’ with a vengeance.”
I don’t recall that at all. I was certainly not seething. I rarely seethe as it is a waste of good mental energy that can be used to actually accomplish something. As I recall, I said I wished Scott would stop flooding Frank Report with one-line responses to almost every comment. It was meant half humorously, and as if it was nothing more than a minor nuisance. If you took my sarcasm as seething, you misunderstood.
I also offered a solution. I said, it would be better if he made one or two thoughtful comments per post. [Scott sometimes offers very interesting insights, and things I hadn’t thought of before – mixed in between his penchant for insulting others.]
What I said I would do at the time and what I have done since, is generally try to limit Scott to only a few comments on each thread. I have continuously deleted his more vicious comments about you – as I have done also with Retard.
I also delete Scott’s rude comments to many other commenters – except Nice Guy – since Nice Guy and Scott seem to like to insult each other and it amuses me. Sometimes it is pretty clever.
By the way, Heidi, I am not afraid of retaliation by Scott, Retard, or anyone else. I don’t think Scott would come back with any aliases. He seems happy to post under his own name. I admire him for that.
As for those who might try something illegal like hacking, I will do my best to defend against that and will report it to authorities. And give tit for tat wherever possible – maybe with compound interest added.
Meantime, let the comments roll. Even Retard’s.