Re: Harassment and Defamation on the Internet

More | Report Post

One can only laugh at the pathetic attempts by Charlene Blake to
garner attention to her bizzare claims of malfeasance by
automakers. It clearly smacks of a neurotic obsession.
When challenged as to the authenticity of her outragious
allegations, she responds with diversion tactics such as this
forum, and launches irrational tirades about how she is being
mistreated by those who disagree with her rants.
One of her favourite expressions...."am not on trial here or
elsewhere", is laughable.
Charlene completely ignores the reality re what she puts into
the public view is always subject to challenge, and makes her
own rules..."NO ONE CAN CHALLENGE ME BECAUSE I'M NOT ON TRIAL!!"
Well Charlene, in a sense YOU aren't on trial, but what you say
publicly is on trial, and always will be.
No one, not even the inscrutable (???) Charlene Blake, can
expect everyone to bow down before her and accept what she says
without question.
Especially when what Charelene claims is so outragious, so
manipulative, so misleading, so full of untruths, so full of
imagery, inference, and innuendo, as to be crying out for
challenge.
Charlene Blake may not be on trial, but her campaign of lies
certainly is.
And she has no right to suggest otherwise!!
When put to the test of truth, integrity, and rational
objectivity, Charlene Blake's claims fail miserably.
Charlene, you have failed, and your failure to admit your
failure is unquestionably your biggest failure!!

OTHER TOYOTA OWNERS who are similarly-affectedOn 4/05/07,
Charlene Blake wrote:
> On 3/15/07, Dave Nightingale wrote:
>> Response To Charlene Blake:
>>
>> You posted this same information on many other websites,
>> including different forums on this site.
>> The administrator on onother forum called you to account for
>> your remarks, yet you have not responded. I wonder why?
>> Just to rmind you of the questions asked by that individual,
>> the following is a copy. It would be interesting to know
>> your answers to what I believe are worthy questions--as
>> follows:
>
> "Dave," I have no idea about what you are referring to and I
> don't know why you feel compelled to challenge my postings
here
> and elsewhere. My postings are directed to other Toyota
owners
> who have had similar experiences. Does this bother you? Are
> you concerned about Toyota owners linking to "compare notes?"
> If not, I am unclear about your extreme interest in my auto
> consumer postings. My first amendment rights allow me the
> freedom to speak online. If my postings were not based on
> fact, then I would not have over 2,000 Toyota owner
signatories
> on my "Toyota Owners Unite for Resolution" petition. Let's
not
> forget that Toyota says there are only 3,200 (funny how this
> number never changes or actually gets smaller, according to
> Toyota!) who are affected by Toyota engine oil sludge. It
> doesn't take a course in rocket science to figure out how
> minimized this figure really is, does it?
>
> I am not on trial here or elsewhere. I am posting to find
> OTHER TOYOTA OWNERS who are similarly-affected. I am also
> attempting to preserve my U.S. Constitutional right to speak
up
> by identifying those who wish to prevent the same. It hasn't
> been difficult to piece the puzzle together regarding the
> defamation. The misspellings, the syntax, the repeated
> phrases, the ISP, the I.P.s, etc....all point to the same
> individual in many of the cases. It doesn't take a detective
> to uncover these things! The zebra's stripes remain the same!