Voodoo On LiveJournal

Original Recipe Beth (nastyboots) wrote in germanshepherds,
@ 2004-08-31 09:56:00

Current mood:	curious
Current music:	ac/dc

comments?
a friend recommended this website to me:

http://www.leerburg.com

now, I know what works with my dog and am not looking to me judged on my methods. I'm just curious how people in this community feel about his methods. it's a sociology question more than anything. :)

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

Re: Let me share a first exchange w/ Mr 'invaluable'

lou_castle
2004-09-16 07:59

I know this conversation is about Leerburg and Ed Frawley but I'm one of three people that Mr. Leigh writes about on his website and last time I looked most of it was devoted to me. So that you'll know just how disturbed Mr. Leigh is some background is necessary.

A quick look at the section of his website where he tells people of his very detailed plans for suicide will reveal that he's deeply disturbed. Even without that someone who maintains a website of that size to criticize three people he's never even met, is a stalker at best and a psychotic at worst.

The problem between Mr. Leigh and myself started when we disagreed on several forums years back, beginning, I think it was, on the PDL (Protection Dogs List). We argued about drives and Ecollars. At one point he asked for my credentials which I presented and then I asked for his. He refused to present any for quite some time, saying that he wasn't required to show me anything. This continued until he realized that his credibility was being placed in doubt. He then presented some vague comments about having trained and titled "many dogs" in AKC obedience, SchH and Ring Sport. He also made references to having trained and supplied dogs to "many" police departments. I asked for specifics, the names of some dogs that he'd titled and references from some PD's that he'd supplied dogs for. I think it's reasonable that someone making those claims would be PROUD to supply that information; yet Mr. Leigh steadfastly refused. When I pointed out to him that in the face of such a refusal it was reasonable to believe that he wasn't being honest, he began personal attacks including name calling, general rudeness and profanity. He was thrown off that list.

But that wasn't enough for him! He showed up on another list I was on and began the debates all over again. They went exactly the same way. He then began a private email war with me. There he went to profanity and name calling immediately. For several weeks we exchanged emails until finally I grew tired of the name calling and responded in kind. After asking him several times to stop bothering me, I had to block his email address to stop his insanity. But he just changed it and sent me another email. This continued until I'd blocked six of his email names. I finally had to block his entire domain to get him to stop.

A few years back his wife passed away. I learned of it about a year afterwards and in spite of our history, sent him a brief sympathy note. I unblocked his addresses and domain to allow him to respond if he cared to; the optimist in me again. I confirmed that he received it but he wasn't even man enough to acknowledge it. A short while ago he did start sending me rude emails again. Up went the blocks again.

And so he retreated to his website where he can write whatever he wants with absolutely no one disagreeing or correcting him. He hasn't shown up on any public lists for a debate since, even though I've invited him numerous times. I believe that he's mentally unbalanced and that he needs medication. At times he goes off for no apparent reason. Out of the clear blue sky he'll email me and tell me to go look at his website. Just a few weeks ago he phoned me. In spite of being told several times to stop he continues.

The truth is that Mr. Leigh has been shown up on so many email lists and forums so many times that knows that he can't defend himself. We already know all of his lies so as soon as he starts to spin them they can be shown for what that are, figments of his imagination. At first it required letters and phone calls to find out that he'd never done any of the things he'd claimed to do, but now all that work has been done. I've invited Mr. Leigh dozens of times to come to any public forum and debate me on any dog training topic, but like the coward he is, he refuses to do so. The comment from the poster that followed his message says it all.

I’m sorry to clutter up your board with this but I think that it's important to know the true character of people who post such nonsense.

Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA
Uncllou@aol.com
For training articles go to www.loucastle.com

Re: Let me share a first exchange w/ Mr 'invaluable'
(Anonymous)
2004-09-16 11:32

Come on Lou, fess up. You are not a respected dog trainer and never have been. So please don't troll your weak opinions here. Ed, Donn and yourself are no where near the calibur of trainer that Gene England is yet you feel that you can put him and his methods (which have worked to a higher level than any of yours) down. You attack everyone and it seemed you took on someone who put up a website and showed just how wrong your opinions are. Face it Lou, you screwed up.

Re: Let me share a first exchange w/ Mr 'invaluable'

lou_castle
2004-09-16 14:35

As far as "attack(ing) everyone" . . . I disagree with people occasionally and when I do, if the mood strikes, I say so. George Bernard Shaw said, "Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted." Just because someone is disagreed with hardly means they're attacked. Only someone who's extremely paranoid, insecure, or mentally unbalanced thinks he's been attacked when someone has a contrary opinion.

As far as Mr. Leigh's website "show(ing) just how wrong (my) opinions are" . . . He just cites his side of the argument. Had he had the courage to do so on a public forum I'd have shown him where he was wrong. And since even on his own website, he refuses to describe in any detail, the basis for his experience and knowledge, his opinions are still in doubt.

It's odd that you say that I'm not a respected dog trainer but then you don't have the courage to even sign your post! That says quite a bit about you. Perhaps you could tell us first, your name, and then, your expertise in training dogs that makes you qualified to make such a statement? I didn't know that there was a rating system for dog trainers, but apparently you're the guy who's in charge of it.

I've never seen Ed train or any dogs that he's trained so I can't comment on him. Likewise, Gene England. I don't ever recall "put(ting) him and his methods . . . down." But perhaps you can cite a post? And you state that Gene works to a "higher level than any of (mine)." I doubt that you've ever seen me, any of my dogs or any dogs that I've worked with, so I wonder what you base this on?

I know that Donn Yarnall started the LAPD K9 narcotics unit and was its head trainer for 6-7 years. I know that he then started the LAPD patrol K-9 unit and was its head trainer for the next 20 years or so until he retired. I know that he's testified as a K-9 expert all over the US. I know that he now does seminars, mostly for law enforcement, all over the US. I know that he was the National training Director for DAD/DAC (Dogs Against Drugs/Dogs Against Crime) for many years. He's trained thousands of dogs for police work. But I guess he doesn't measure up to your standards.

As for myself; I was one of three officers elected to be K-9 handlers when my department started a K-9 unit in 1979. I worked as a handler for about 5 1/2 years. Then, because all assignments on my department rotate, when my dog retired, I moved to another assignment. In this area all medium and small size departments (with less than 500) sworn officers) ( with only 1 or 2 exceptions) hire an outside trainer to do their maintenance training. But my department didn't. Instead I was in charge of the K-9 training for the next 15 years. No matter what assignment I worked, on K-9 training nights I went out and ran the training. Occasionally I'd piss off a lieutenant and he'd kick me out of training. That would last for a few months. Then, several years ago I was injured and no longer able to do the training. About a year later they hired an outside vendor to do our training. So I guess I was good enough for them; but of course, just for 20 years.

A few years back I co-founded the LACPCA (Los Angeles County Police Canine Assn.) which exists to train K-9 handlers in LA County, and do other support functions. I served as President for about 5 years and then as Vice-President for another two. When I left office the treasury was over $140,000, we had put on two seminars bringing in trainers for all over the US and had done 7 expos. So I guess I was good enough for them.

I've done 20 seminars in 18 cities and two foreign countries. I've got two more planned for the rest of the year. So I guess I was good enough for them.

And finally, since you pretend not to be Mr. Leigh I'll challenge you to a public debate on any dog training question you like, that we disagree on. How about the Leerburg Forum? Only problem is you can't post there in this cowardly, anonymous fashion. That alone is probably enough for you to run off and hide.

Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA
Uncllou@aol.com
For training articles go to www.loucastle.com

Re: Let me share a first exchange w/ Mr 'invaluable'
(Anonymous)
2004-09-16 16:08

My name is Steve Leigh, creator of the World Famous Frawley/Castle Website. Once again, I am not "anonymous".

Anyone who can read, can easily see that the WFFCW has nothing to do with disagreements or opinions - it has to do with personal attacks, lies, and fabrications. Poor Voodoo Louie complained to my ISP 17 times in 21 days, but the legal and security supervisors would NOT take that website down. Just above, Voodoo is attacking someone who he CLAIMS is pretending to be me - :) It only shows how deep his paranoia runs, and again proves he isn't capable of determining the truth before running off his face. Being truthful isn't on Louie's menu. Voodoo Louie has no interest in facts, which is why the BRAND NEW LOU page exists on the WFFCW. The link is

http://www.sl-prokeys.com/wffcw/index.htm

and you simply "enter" then click on Voodoo Louie Castle. From there, it's BRAND NEW LOU.

I hope many of you will read this particular page - it's quite easy - Voodoo's words are in RED, my rebuttal words are in BLUE. In particular, you might note the conflicts contained in the Sept. 6 addition.

Furthermore, I have offered in TWO places on that page to make the entire Voodoo Louie section DISAPPEAR - if he can come up with valid proof of his lies. As I am publicly stating this here and now, I'm reiterating the same offer: come up with valid proof, the entire Voodoo section disappears before dark - today.

Voodoo has been invited numerous times to join the forum located at the WFFCW, and prove (if he's capable of it) where and how ANY of the content of that website is false. It's not there to "debate" or "disagree" - it's there to ILLUSTRATE and that's precisely what it does. It illustrates Voodoo Louie's OWN MESSAGES, which he refuses to accept responsibility for, even with various forms of proof.

Voodoo manages to manipulate many people, but Voodoo can't manipulate me.

Best,

Steve Leigh
ISP: 68.202.56.47 - Tampabay Roadrunner - (the same ISP for approximately 10 months now)
Definitely not anonymous.

Re: Let me share a first exchange w/ Mr 'invaluable'

lou_castle
2004-09-16 23:31

LC: First off has anyone noticed that Steve hasn't responded to a single statement I made in my previous post? Not the ones about me or Donn Yarnall either? This is his style, ignore the truth and continue on his psychotic rant.

Steve Leigh wrote: Poor Voodoo Louie complained to my ISP 17 times in 21 days

LC: This is a lie and it's already been covered.

LC: I'm new here so I'm not familiar with what the policy is on rudeness, name calling and other such flaming. Do the moderators control such things? I haven't seen it

Steve Leigh wrote: Just above, Voodoo is attacking someone who he CLAIMS is pretending to be me - :)

LC: This is what Steve does. He makes statements like this, that I "claimed" that the previous poster was him. I never "claimed" that this person who attacked me was Steve, I said quite clearly, " since you pretend not to be Mr. Leigh . . ." I made a GUESS (not a claim) based on the fact that he writes nonsense with no foundation, just as you do. As for my reply to him being "an attack." Steve is one of those people who thinks he's being attacked anytime someone has a different opinion than him. He's been tossed off every dog training board where he disagreed with me because he then went to flaming. He's also been tossed off just about every organ (the musical instrument) board that's on the web; for the same sort of behavior. That's where his real expertise lies making organ parts.

Steve Leigh wrote: It only shows how deep his paranoia runs

LC: Paranoia is a sickness where you think people are out to get your and they're not. In this case, you've been cyber stalking me for several years. At one point you changed your email address about half a dozen times so that you could keep getting through to me and now, in the past several weeks you've been phoning me rather regularly, in spite of being asked almost every time to stop. That's not paranoia Steve, you ARE stalking me.

Steve Leigh wrote: Furthermore, I have offered in TWO places on that page to make the entire Voodoo Louie section DISAPPEAR - if he can come up with valid proof of his lies.

LC: I have no interest in visiting your website. If you want to have a discussion here, that's fine by me. I'm willing to bet that you won't; that you'll run back to your website where you're safe and no one can dispute anything you say.

Steve Leigh wrote: Voodoo has been invited numerous times to join the forum located at the WFFCW, and prove (if he's capable of it) where and how ANY of the content of that website is false.

LC: It's quite obvious from the number of anonymous posts on Steve's site that he's probably writing them himself. He claims 1.2 million hits and thinks that everyone who sees it thinks that it's "funny." Right here we see a dissenter who realizes that the person who maintains the website is the disturbed one. But in any case, why would I want to join a forum run by this psycho? There are plenty of completely neutral forums where debates can be run. Of course you won't be allowed on any of the old sites because you've been banned from them, isn't that true Steve. Steve if I'm the one who always lying why is it that you're the one who's been banned from the numerous lists where you've tried to debate me?

Steve Leigh wrote: It's not there to "debate" or "disagree"

LC: Of course not. You've already tried debating with me and gotten your ass kicked and been made to look like a fool so many times that you're afraid to do it again. That's why you created your website!

LC: And finally anyone who doubts what I've written about my background can call my department, 310.837.1221 and ask for Captain Black. He'll tell you about my history there. So Steve are you ready to tell us the names and dates of dogs you've certified? Are you ready to tell us the names of a few police departments you've trained dogs for. Or are you going to cry like a little girl and tell us that you don't have to give me anything, as you've done so many times before?

Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA
Uncllou@aol.com
For training articles go to www.loucastle.com

Re: Let me share a first exchange w/ Mr 'invaluable'

steveleigh
2004-09-16 22:25

Steve Leigh writing this message - not anonymous.

Voodoo Lou Castle wrote:

"Likewise, Gene England. I don't ever recall "put(ting) him and his methods . . . down." But perhaps you can cite a post?"

Since this is (another) blatant Voodoo Louie lie, the proof of that is located right here, in which I can cite NUMEROUS posts:

http://www.sl-prokeys.com/wffcw/vl_newlou.htm

and right here:

http://www.sl-prokeys.com/wffcw/vl_attackprot.htm

Voodoo Louie states in plain english:

"DOES use electricity on the testicles of dogs that he trains and that he DOES habitually choke dogs to the point of unconsciousness".

These *public* statements were made in reference to me, and Louie further accuses Gene England of *training* me to do these things.

There is absolutely no question about this.

Sorry Voodoo Louie, you're not voodooing your way out of *THIS* one.

Steve Leigh
steve at sl-prokeys dot com

Re: Let me share a first exchange w/ Mr 'invaluable'

lou_castle
2004-09-17 00:03

Re: Let me share a first exchange w/ Voodoo

steveleigh
2004-09-17 03:06 (link)

Steve Leigh wrote: Steve Leigh writing this message - not anonymous.

LC: Want just a small example of Steve's sickness? Notice how many times he writes this statement at the beginning of his messages and at the end of some of them. This, in spite of the fact that he's signed them.

Well pardon ME for my sickness - I am defintitely identifying myself. If that doesn't meet with YOUR approval - that's just too bad, isn't it?

Earlier I wrote: "Likewise, Gene England. I don't ever recall "put(ting) him and his methods . . . down." But perhaps you can cite a post?"

Steve Leigh wrote: Since this is (another) blatant Voodoo Louie lie, the proof of that is located right here

LC: And then Steve posts a link to his website. Steve is there some reason that you can't just cut and paste the post you claim I wrote?

Yep - there's a reason. It's all there on the website - I'm not cutting and pasting ANYTHING. I don't work for you. You want cut 'n paste, go get a court order, or cut 'n paste yourself. Otherwise. click the link. (Just like 18,000 other people have in the last 30 days.)

Anyone knows that it's possible to write anything you want and say that someone else wrote it.

Yep, but YOU wrote it.

But in any case, I hit the link before I realized that it was to your site. Since I was there I looked around but somehow COULDN'T find any such post in which I put Gene England down. LOL

That only proves you can't READ. There are schools available to help you with this problem.

Steve Leigh wrote: "DOES use electricity on the testicles of dogs that he trains and that he DOES habitually choke dogs to the point of unconsciousness".

LC: I may have written that sentence.

MAY have? No - in fact you DID write it. Several times.

It may also have been preceded by "I've been told that. . . " and followed by, "I've never seen it myself so I can't say." It may have been preceded by any of a thousand other disclaimers but since you only post what you think will win your side of the discussion, we'll never know.

Well you take your thousand disclaimers, and try and prove you DIDN'T write these things. I really don't care - the bottom line is simple: YOU WROTE THEM. Meanwhile, the evidence remains.

This is something else you do with great regularity. Many of the exchanges you have on your site are modified to make you look good and me look bad.

Absolutely nothing is modified. One careful read is all it takes. Frankly, who cares about making ME look good? Not me! But if you look BAD, that's a result of your own messages. Don't blame it on ME!

That's why they can't be trusted. In the past you've stopped at nothing to win an argument, including lying and this is not any different.

Prove even ONE lie and the website disappears. Would that make you HAPPY, Voodoo? YOU ALONE can get rid of that website - just come up with valid proof. Any old time you're ready. I've been waiting three YEARS.

You've had years to make these forgeries. The mere fact that you've done so shows how deeply disturbed you are.

No, Voodoo, YOU'RE disturbed. Prove even ONE forgery. No matter how you scream and squeal, that website's been hit like a hurricane - and there's not a damn thing you can do about it. Doesn't disturb me a bit, but it's driving you up a wall.

Steve Leigh wrote: There is absolutely no question about this.

LC: Sure there is. They're lies and you're lying.

Any time you can come up with proof of lies, do it. Until then - lotsa luck to ya, Voodoo.

Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA
Uncllou@aol.com

Regards,
Steve Leigh
steve at sl-prokeys dot com

Re: Let me share a first exchange w/ Voodoo -

lou_castle, 2004-09-21 19:12:51

Re: Let me share a first exchange w/ Mr 'invaluable'

steveleigh
2004-09-20 02:05

Louie Castle:
It's odd that you say that I'm not a respected dog trainer but then you don't have the courage to even sign your post! That says quite a bit about you. Perhaps you could tell us first, your name, and then, your expertise in training dogs that makes you qualified to make such a statement?

Still interrogating, Louie? You're the official internet grand jury?

Louie Castle:
Likewise, Gene England. I don't ever recall "put(ting) him and his methods . . . down." But perhaps you can cite a post? And you state that Gene works to a "higher level than any of (mine)." I doubt that you've ever seen me, any of my dogs or any dogs that I've worked with, so I wonder what you base this on?

Your own messages, in which you publicly accuse me (Steve Leigh) of hanging dogs to unconsiousness, and LEARNING these methods from Gene England. You also included "shocking dogs on their testicles (what do we do with bitches? Loan them some testicles?)

Louie Castle:
I know that Donn Yarnall [blah, blah, blah] ... I know that he now does seminars, mostly for law enforcement,

Don Yarnell hasn't been involved in the training of 1/50th the number of police dogs that Gene England has. Period.

Louie Castle:
I know that he was the National training Director for DAD/DAC (Dogs Against Drugs/Dogs Against Crime) for many years.

Gene England (a civilian) has been involved in both programs since the 1980s. What's new?

Louie Castle:
Then, because all assignments on my department rotate, when my dog retired, I moved to another assignment.

You SURE DID! You were kind enough to explain in gruesome detail all about your "career" ..... and conclusively proved you are dishonest. In plain English, that means you are a liar.

Louie Castle:
In this area all medium and small size departments (with less than 500) sworn officers) ( with only 1 or 2 exceptions) hire an outside trainer to do their maintenance training. But my department didn't. Instead I was in charge of the K-9 training for the next 15 years. No matter what assignment I worked, on K-9 training nights I went out and ran the training. Occasionally I'd piss off a lieutenant and he'd kick me out of training.

Your own messages prove that this is nothing but blatant fabrication (meaning lies). But the GOOD part of THIS is ...... since when does a LIEUTENANT handle K9? Hahahahaha! The answer is simple - HE DOESN'T. He's in CHARGE of a K9 unit. You bet your ass they kicked you out!

Louie Castle:
That would last for a few months. Then, several years ago I was injured and no longer able to do the training.

Louie - you toss around time like it's confetti. "A few years" here, "a few months" there, 15 years now, 20 years 2 messages later. The rest of the world lives by a CALENDAR. You obviously don't.

Louie Castle:
About a year later they hired an outside vendor to do our training.

But Louie, you claimed "outside vendors" did all the "basic training" for your department, THEN you "rode around with them". Care to explain THIS conflict in your own words?

Louie Castle:
When I left office the treasury was over $140,000,

Borrow some of that big-time cash, and get your LAWSUIT going, then.

Louie Castle:
I've done 20 seminars in 18 cities and two foreign countries. I've got two more planned for the rest of the year. So I guess I was good enough for them.

Prove it.

Louie Castle:
And finally, since you pretend not to be Mr. Leigh

No Louie - *THIS* is Mr. Leigh. *I'M* writing this message, and it damn well ain't anonymous.

Regards,
Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA
Uncllou@aol.com

Even MORE regards, Voodoo Louie,
Steve Leigh
steve at sl-prokeys dot com
Home of the WFFCW where Voodoo Louie Castle is shredded endlessly.

http://www.sl-prokeys.com/wffcw/index.htm

Re: Let me share a first exchange w/ Mr 'invaluable'
(Anonymous)
2004-09-16 17:03

My name is Steve Leigh. I am not anonymous. I can be contacted at steve at sl-prokeys dot com anytime. My IP is 68.202.56.47.

The person who wrote the above post is *DEAD ACCURATE*.

Voodoo Louie attacks anyone he cares to, and numerous moderators allow him to do so. Frawley is Louie's "cyber-sweetie", so one can expect that *anything* from Frawley's "webboard" is siding with Louie. It's simply not a level playing field, and never was.

Indeed, Frawley and Castle took on someone - that's me, Steve Leigh - who refuses to accept their kind of public abuse. But if anyone READS, it's glaringly obvious we aren't talking about "differences of opinion", "training methods", or anything even vaguely related - not at all. We're talking about public attacks, humiliation, degrading, outright lies and fabrications directed at discrediting specific individual(s).

Both Frawley and Voodoo Louie fail to accept an elementary fact: the WFFCW could not possibly exist without their own written messages.

Now the best that Voodoo can come up with is more lies: he claims they're "forgeries".

The best *I* can come up with is honest facts: they aren't "forgeries" and there are (presumably) archives for every list, in addition to my own "evidence zipfile", linked on every page of the WFFCW.

The "evidence" clearly shows the dates, times, tracking info, IP numbers, and header info for every message. Many of the "evidence" components are direct screen captures (just click FILE on your browser, and save the whole page as an HTML document - it's easy).

So - whoever anonymously wrote the above message - you're right. "Face it Lou, you screwed up" - KING SIZE. Voodoo's pages have totalled nearly one million views at this time.

Best,
Steve Leigh
steve at sl-prokeys dot com
IP: 68.202.56.47
This is not an anonymous message.

Re: Let me share a first exchange w/ Mr 'invaluable'

lou_castle
2004-09-17 01:53

Steve Leigh wrote: Voodoo Louie attacks anyone he cares to

LC: Notice that we've only exchanged a couple of messages here and already Steve is calling me names. There's an old rule of lawyering that says if you have the facts, argue the facts; but if you don't attack the person.

Steve Leigh wrote: Frawley is Louie's "cyber-sweetie", so one can expect that *anything* from Frawley's "webboard" is siding with Louie. It's simply not a level playing field, and never was.

LC: ROFL. I've never even met Ed Frawley. In fact I've written a couple of times that some of his methods are too heavy handed for me so this is just more of your nonsense. And you're so far off about the "webboard (sic) siding with me" that it's hilarious. There are quite a few people there that I've disagreed with and have pissed off, just like anyone with much of an Internet presence. I wonder how anyone would control an entire web board and make everyone side with me?

Steve Leigh wrote: Indeed, Frawley and Castle took on someone - that's me, Steve Leigh - who refuses to accept their kind of public abuse.

LC: There was no abuse Steve, public or otherwise. There was simple logic and reason and you responded with profanity and name calling. After a while of taking it I responded in kind. It's interesting that your website somehow leaves out those messages of your, the ones that started the flaming.

Steve Leigh wrote: We're talking about public attacks, humiliation, degrading, outright lies and fabrications directed at discrediting specific individual(s).

LC: Yes you've done all those things and I'm glad that you're finally admitting it. I'd really wish you'd conduct yourself in a more professional manner.

Steve Leigh wrote: Both Frawley and Voodoo Louie fail to accept an elementary fact: the WFFCW could not possibly exist without their own written messages.

LC: I can't speak for Ed but I know very well that much of your website is made up of posts from lists and private email exchanges. Your statement that I "fail to accept" it, is just more of your nonsense. Of course you've edited those posts to make yourself look good and me (again, can't speak for Ed) look bad." And then you've added your own comments, that weren't in the original emails. This is what I'm referring to when I say that you've retreated to your own website where you can't be corrected or interrupted.

Steve Leigh wrote: Now the best that Voodoo can come up with is more lies: he claims they're "forgeries".

LC: I'm sorry that I can't be any more imaginative. But the fact is that some *are* outright forgeries. Some are parts of formerly accurate conversations but you've edited them to take out key points that were being made.

Steve Leigh wrote: The best *I* can come up with is honest facts: they aren't "forgeries" and there are (presumably) archives for every list, in addition to my own "evidence zipfile", linked on every page of the WFFCW.

LC: Steve anyone with enough expertise to set up a website such as yours can also make up a zipfile to go along with it. Try directing someone to the actual discussion list archives, not your conveniently edited zipfiles.

Steve Leigh wrote: Voodoo's pages have totalled nearly one million views at this time.

LC: Here's just a quick view of Steve's propensity for the truth. Earlier he wrote, "I simply copied messages into my website, which has been sitting there collecting over 1.2 million views. . . " but now he says that the view count is "nearly one million." His sickness (psychosis, habitual lying or both) is so great that he can't remember what he wrote from moment to moment *from his own website.* How does anyone think that he can keep track of dozens, perhaps hundreds of emails and thousands of words when he can't even get a simple hit-counter right?

Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA
Uncllou@aol.com
loucastle.com

Re: Let me share a first exchange w/ Mr 'invaluable'

steveleigh
2004-09-17 13:36

Steve Leigh wrote: Now the best that Voodoo can come up with is more lies: he claims they're "forgeries".

LC: I'm sorry that I can't be any more imaginative. But the fact is that some *are* outright forgeries.

So am I. Prove ONE forgery, and it will disappear.

Some are parts of formerly accurate conversations but you've edited them to take out key points that were being made.

Prove this, and the "key points" will be inserted.

Steve Leigh wrote: The best *I* can come up with is honest facts: they aren't "forgeries" and there are (presumably) archives for every list, in addition to my own "evidence zipfile", linked on every page of the WFFCW.

LC: Steve anyone with enough expertise to set up a website such as yours can also make up a zipfile to go along with it. Try directing someone to the actual discussion list archives, not your conveniently edited zipfiles.

The zipfile contains precisely what I said: including all header and routing info. This will lead anyone right back to the archives for the list(s), and can be compared in seconds - word for word. Even your punctuation has not been altered.

Steve Leigh wrote: Voodoo's pages have totalled nearly one million views at this time.

LC: Here's just a quick view of Steve's propensity for the truth. Earlier he wrote, "I simply copied messages into my website, which has been sitting there collecting over 1.2 million views. . . " but now he says that the view count is "nearly one million." His sickness (psychosis, habitual lying or both) is so great that he can't remember what he wrote from moment to moment *from his own website.* How does anyone think that he can keep track of dozens, perhaps hundreds of emails and thousands of words when he can't even get a simple hit-counter right?

LOL - :) The WFFCW has had over 1.2 million hits. Voodoo Louie's pages have totalled about one million. Other pages, such as Frawley's and Yarnell's bring the total up to over 1.2 million, moving quickly towards 1,250,000.

The habitual liar is not me, and that is CLEARLY shown on the WFFCW. The proof of that is right where it's always been. Louie's claims of "editing" and "forging" are expected from someone who is in total denial of what he's done. Louie doesn't want to accept RESPONSIBILITY for the facts contained in the WFFCW.

Yet he can't seem to come up with even *one specific* forgery. Not ONE .....
Of all the words on that website, Louie can't even come up with *valid proof* that even ONE sentence is wrong, and should be removed. And he's had THREE YEARS to do it.

If the WFFCW contains "lies and forgeries", wouldn't it be proper for Voodoo Louie to PROVE that?

Steve Leigh

Re: Let me share a first exchange w/ Mr 'invaluable'

lou_castle
2004-09-21 19:30

Steve Leigh wrote: So am I. Prove ONE forgery, and it will disappear.

LC: Discussed elsewhere

Earlier I wrote: Some are parts of formerly accurate conversations but you've edited them to take out key points that were being made.

Steve Leigh responded: Prove this, and the "key points" will be inserted.

LC: I'm sorry Steve; but I'm not the obsessed one in this discussion. I haven't saved email exchanges with you from 5-6 years ago as you've done. And even if I had and posted them here, you'd just claim that I had altered them. When I first read your website, years ago, right after we'd had those exchanges, I realized that you were editing my posts as they appeared on your site.

Steve Leigh wrote: The zipfile contains precisely what I said: including all header and routing info. This will lead anyone right back to the archives for the list(s), and can be compared in seconds - word for word. Even your punctuation has not been altered.

LC: All of that can be altered, as you've demonstrated.

Steve Leigh wrote: The WFFCW has had over 1.2 million hits. Voodoo Louie's pages have totalled about one million. Other pages, such as Frawley's and Yarnell's bring the total up to over 1.2 million, moving quickly towards 1,250,000.

LC: Quick back peddle Steve, but it's too late your lies are out there. Now you want us to believe that each page of the website has a counter. ROFL.

Steve Leigh wrote: If the WFFCW contains "lies and forgeries", wouldn't it be proper for Voodoo Louie to PROVE that?

LC: It's impossible to prove a negative Steve. And your repeated challenging me to do so makes you look like a bigger fool every time you do it.

Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA
Uncllou@aol.com
For training articles go to www.loucastle.com

Re: Let me share a first exchange w/ Mr 'invaluable' -

steveleigh, 2004-09-21 20:18:17

	STILL waiting for any proof steveleigh 2004-09-17 22:41
	Looks like Voodoo Louie Castle is having a little problem: he hasn't provided one shred of proof, yet he's been publicly offered removal of "his" website which he cries, screams, and whines about if he'll come up with *** PROOF *** WHERE IS THE PROOF, VOODOO LOUIE? We're still waiting. Steve Leigh steve at sl-prokeys dot com

Re: STILL waiting for any proof -

lou_castle, 2004-09-21 20:20:30

Sgt. Castle
(Anonymous)
2004-09-18 13:20

To begin with I do not want to be anonymous. My name is CAPTAIN HAGGERTY. I thought this was supposed to be about German Shepherds. Hark! It will now be devoted to Sgt. Castle and his ersatz experience with dogs along with his matyrdom. I enjoyed Sgt. Castle's G. B. Shaw quote, "Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted." It was intended for Steve Leigh but Sgt. Castle is not clever enough to realize that it applys to him ALSO. A word to the member of this list: Realize that NO ONE is permitted to contradict Sgt. Castle. Should you want proof of that I would go to http://www.sl-prokeys.com/wffcw/index.htm
Another quote, one that Sgt. Castle doesn't use but one that he has built his entire life upon is, "Nur einer tausendfachen Weiderholung einfachster Begriffe wird endlich ihr Gedaechtnis schenken" Basically it means Repeat the simplest lie 1,000 times over and you'll capture everyone's mind. It appeared in a Best Selling book called "Mein Kampf" written by one Adolf Hitler. There is a lot of truth in that sentece. Sgt. Castle hasn't fooled Steve Leigh or myself but there are many out there that believe the pap that he continually regurgetates a 1,000 times over. An amazing thing about it is that he fools people that appear to be more knowledgable than he (not that it would be that hard). Sgt. Castle has his minnions out there protecting him and bowing down to him.

An analyisis: If you read Sgt. Castle's post you will see they are an attempt to show that he is a legitimate, honest police officer with a great deal of experience in training dogs. There is very little information put forth (good or bad and he seesm to prefer the latter) unless his wonderfulness is considered "information". Oh, by the way, he is the world's leading expert. On what? Like Prof. Irwin Corey------------everything.

Let's not take up cyberspace with "a short (about 4 1/2 hours)announcement from our sponser, Sgt. Castle" You can see his redundant drivel on http://www.sl-prokeys.com/wffcw/index.htm
if you are interested.

Let's talk dawgs. Let's talk German Shepherds.

CAPTAIN HAGGERTY
Publisher of the AGGRESSION NEWSLETTER
Sept. 19-25th this year is National Dog Week www.nationaldogweek.com
Denver has PROUDLY killed 410 "pit bulls" in 2003. Fight BSL. Say No to Denver
"How To Teach Your Dog To Talk" is the world's greatest trick book. It is a training theory book in disguise."---Bob Maida
www.HaggertyDog.com

Re: Sgt. Castle

steveleigh
2004-09-18 14:07

Ahhhh .... a message contradicting Louie Castle!

Allow me to quote Louie:
LC: Notice that we've only exchanged a couple of messages here and already Steve is calling me names.

Now, if you'd be kind enough, scroll back up this page to Louie's FIRST entry. Who is calling WHO names, right from the get-go?

I would like to direct anyone who is curious to this particular page:

http://www.sl-prokeys.com/wffcw/vl_newlou.htm

Please be kind enough to read this, and if you are somewhat impatient, simply click the link at the top of the page to SEPT. 6. This section (about 4 minutes of reading) alone illustrates in a nutshell what the general (internet) public _should_ know about Louie Castle. It clearly illustrates his inaccuracies and dishonesty. (Along with a little sarcasm on my part.) Truth evades Louie entirely, and that is clearly illustrated.

It will take about 7-10 minutes to read and absorb the *entire* page. Kindly note: there has been no communication between Louie and myself since approximately 2001, and the new messages contained on this page date from August and September 2004, when Louie decided to mix it up with me again. Apparently, Louie has not YET learned that I'm not like most people he mixes it up with.

On this page, I freely and PUBLICLY offer to remove all reference to Louie - if he can come up with VALID PROOF of his endless falsifications.

If Louie were honest, he would have already come forth with valid proof, and the above website would be about 1/2 the size it is currently. By VALID PROOF, I am specifically *not* referring to more and more and more of his endless babbling internet messages, I am referring to VALID proof - legitimate, archived copies of messages, scanned photographs, full screen page captures, anything at all that can be verified as VALID PROOF.

Since Louie is so quick to accuse, and his "facts" are so completely in conflict from one message to the next, VALID PROOF is required to resolve his repeated accusations of "lies and forgeries".

Thank you in advance for looking at that specific page,

Steve Leigh
steve at sl-prokeys dot com
IP: 68.202.56.47

ps: as for German Shepherds, I have some really nice pictures, Ahnentafels, and a video or two located on my main website. I hope you enjoy them. There's even an article about a "make believe" Shepherd (he happens to be a wild grey fox), and pictures/movies of him doing bitework.

Re: Sgt. Castle
(Anonymous)
2004-09-18 14:42

C'mon Steve please stop "picking on" Sgt. Castle. Let him do it himself. Steve, your state,emt, "Allow me to quote Louie:
LC: Notice that we've only exchanged a couple of messages here and already Steve is calling me names." is WRONG. Sgt. Castle cut and pasted that. He doesn't have time to write all that trash. Sgt. Castle, being the wonderful environmentalist that he is continually recycles his trash. Go back to the archives and I'll bet you a nickle he has posted that a dozen times before. He follows Hitler's dictum to the letter by repeating the lies a thousand times over----verbatim. Everybody wants to be a dog behaviorist. Let's talk about human behavior and realize what Sgt. Castle does is transference. He doesn't realize it and he can't stop doing it. He has his own demons to fight so forget about him----as best you can because he wants to take over this list with his "advertisements". Let's talk dawgs.

CAPTAIN HAGGERTY
Former Commanding Officer US Army K-9 Corps
Author of "Dog Tricks" w/ Carol Benjamin
"How To Get Your Pet Into Show Business"
"Talking To Your Dog" - England
"Jeux de chein" - France
"How To Teach Your Dog To Talk"
Publisher of the AGGRESSION NEWSLETTER
Support National Dog Week Sept. 19-25,2004
www.HaggertyDog.com
Supporting Denver is supporting BSL
"The more someone lies to me the less I believe them." - Haggerty
"Everyone has a right to be stupid." - Haggerty
"There is only one hard and fast rule in dog training. There are no hard and fast rules in dog training' - Haggerty
"I do not believe that anyone that doesn't believe in a method should use it or teach it." - Haggerty

Re: Sgt. Castle

lou_castle
2004-09-21 21:00

Haggerty wrote: Let's talk about human behavior and realize what Sgt. Castle does is transference.

LC: Hag spends a great deal of his time in "The pot calling the kettle black." Notice that no where was his name mentioned until he decided to jump in with a personal attack on me. It's just his style to attack someone else personally and then claim that they started it.

Haggerty wrote: Let's talk dawgs.

LC: and yet another post from Hag, without a single word about dogs or dog training. Take a look at his last post. Hag's signature line often exceeds the length of his posts. This time it's pretty close. And he says that *I'm* trying to take over the list with *my* advertisements! ROFL.

Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA
Uncllou@aol.com
For training articles go to www.loucastle.com

Re: Sgt. Castle

lou_castle
2004-09-21 20:47

Steve Leigh wrote: Kindly note: there has been no communication between Louie and myself since approximately 2001 . . .and September 2004.

LC: Quite simply another of Steve's lies. In late November of 2003 I learned that Steve's wife had passed away about a year earlier. At that time I wrote him a post expressing my sympathy at his loss. Here's the post.

++++++++++++++
Subj: I'm sorry
Date: 11/29/2003
To:steve at sl-prokeys dot com

Steve I just learned of the death of your wife.

In spite of our unpleasant history I wanted to let you know that I'm sorry for your loss.

Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA
(UnclLou@aol.com
++++++++++++++++

LC: At that time I unblocked all of his email address in case he wanted to reply but he wasn't even man enough to do so. Later when we were in yet another of our conflicts I asked him about it. Here's his response (which also contains the text of my message asking if he'd received it.

+++++++++++++++
At 08:52 PM 8/14/2004, I wrote:

You reminded me Steve. Did you receive the post I sent about your wife?

I never heard back from you, not that I really expected to.

And Steve responded with:

I received it. I felt no need to respond.
++++++++++++++++++

Steve Leigh wrote: Apparently, Louie has not YET learned that I'm not like most people he mixes it up with.

LC: You're right Steve. I keep hoping that one of these times you'll stop the insane rambling and have a real conversation. But you never fail to live down to your reputation. You go to name calling right away and I again block your email addresses.

Steve Leigh wrote: If Louie were honest, he would have already come forth with valid proof, and the above website would be about 1/2 the size it is currently. By VALID PROOF, I am specifically *not* referring to more and more and more of his endless babbling internet messages, I am referring to VALID proof - legitimate, archived copies of messages, scanned photographs, full screen page captures, anything at all that can be verified as VALID PROOF.

LC: As I've said before, I'm not the one who's obsessed. I don't save email messages from 5-7 years back; that would be you. I'm not the one with the huge website about three other people; that would be you. I'm not the one who has spent time preparing messages in color so that people can see who said what; that would be you. I'm not the one who stalks you around the Internet and then posts an idiotic website; that would be you. That's ALL you! And even if I did have such proof, you'd just repeat your constant refrain over again, "He's lying. He's lying." The burden of proof is clearly on you. Zipfiles just don't cut it. It just shows the depth that you'd sink to, to try and make your, very weak, point.

LC: Instead of this "he said he said" nonsense, why don't you post something that we've disagreed on, we'll have a discussion about dog training and then people can judge for themselves? We know the answer don't we Steve? You're simply afraid to get shown up, yet again.

Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA
Uncllou@aol.com
For training articles go to www.loucastle.com

Re: Sgt. Castle

steveleigh
2004-09-21 21:42

And here is yet ONE MORE example of the Voodoo Time Machine:
Would someone kindly look in a dictionary? Is the word "accurate" synonymous with "truth"? Or is my dictionary a forgery, too?
===================================================
LC: Quite simply another of Steve's lies. In late November of 2003 I learned that Steve's wife had passed away about a year earlier. At that time I wrote him a post expressing my sympathy at his loss. Here's the post.

Now - if one looks around here, *right here* - on this very LiveJournal message system - one can see that Louie claims my wife died "a few years back". He then claims "about a year later, I wrote him [blah blah blah]".

Suddenly, like a magical Voodoo trick, "a few years back" became "about a year earlier". And suddenly, Voodoo *magically* recalls the time when he DID send me his (phony) sympathy message.

In FACT, my wife died on August 21, 2003, at 2:45 PM EST. I should know this - she died in my arms.
In FACT, 101 days later, Voodoo Louie wrote his bogus "sorry" message, which - in my estimation - was as sincere and honest as the REST of Voodoo's messages. NOT.

I probably committed a felony by refusing to acknowledge Voodoo's fake "sympathy" message, and I'll undoubtedly be scheduled for lethal injection for this - I just don't believe "sincere" exists in Voodoo Louie, be that regarding the death of my loving wife, or anything else. I'm convinced he's a manipulating liar, always was, always will be.

++++++++++++++
Subj: I'm sorry
Date: 11/29/2003
To:steve at sl-prokeys dot com

Steve I just learned of the death of your wife.

In spite of our unpleasant history I wanted to let you know that I'm sorry for your loss.

Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA
(UnclLou@aol.com
++++++++++++++++

LC: At that time I unblocked all of his email address in case he wanted to reply but he wasn't even man enough to do so. Later when we were in yet another of our conflicts I asked him about it. Here's his response (which also contains the text of my message asking if he'd received it.

+++++++++++++++
At 08:52 PM 8/14/2004, I wrote:

You reminded me Steve. Did you receive the post I sent about your wife?

I never heard back from you, not that I really expected to.

And Steve responded with:

I received it. I felt no need to respond.
++++++++++++++++++

That's right.
I responded to people who I KNOW to be sincere and honest, people who actually _care_ and felt _compassion_.

(Incidentally, in case Voodoo cares to accuse me of forging any of THESE messages, they're all being screen captured, too. :))

Steve Leigh
http://www.sl-prokeys.com/wffcw/index.htm
click on Voodoo Louie Castle and enjoy!

	Re: Sgt. Castle (Anonymous) 2004-09-19 11:00
	I agree with you Capt. Had a look at your website. Umm are you really "Butterbean"?

	Re: Sgt. Castle (Anonymous) 2004-09-20 22:38
	Are you kids done yet???

Re: Sgt. Castle

lou_castle
2004-09-21 20:14 [Please note: the BOLD HIGHLIGHT was added by me.]

Haggerty wrote: To begin with I do not want to be anonymous. My name is CAPTAIN HAGGERTY.

LC: Actually your name is Arthur Haggerty. "Captain" is a title that you adopted in the hopes of fooling people into believing that you retired honorably from the military with that rank. The truth is that you left the military after only 9 years of service. I thank you for that service but I think there's something wrong with someone who thinks that he's entitled to wear that rank for the rest of his life.

Haggerty wrote: Hark! It will now be devoted to Sgt. Castle

LC: First, as to my title, I *am* a police sergeant and have been since 1973. right now I'm nearing the 29th year of law enforcement work. If you add in my military service, nearly 4 years in the Air Force, my length of service totals nearly four times yours.

LC: Second, I didn't start this conversation about me. Your buddy Steve Leigh (and it's quite fitting that you've chosen to align yourself with him) did.

Haggerty wrote: and his ersatz experience with dogs along with his matyrdom.

LC: My experience lies almost entirely with police service dogs, SAR and personal protection dogs. As stated before I've done 20 seminars in 18 cities and two foreign countries.

LC: As far as my "martyrdom" that's a term applied by your friend Steve after I detailed why I was not the K9 trainer for my department anymore.

Haggerty wrote: I enjoyed Sgt. Castle's G. B. Shaw quote, "Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted." It was intended for Steve Leigh but Sgt. Castle is not clever enough to realize that it applys to him ALSO.

LC: It applies to everyone. But I realize the difference between a personal attack and a contradiction. The first contains name calling, as Steve has always done. The first contains personal attacks, such as your comment that my experience is "ersatz."

Haggerty wrote: A word to the member of this list: Realize that NO ONE is permitted to contradict Sgt. Castle.

LC: Anyone is encouraged to contradict me. I'm always willing to learn, but some people think they already know it all.

Haggerty wrote: there are many out there that believe the pap that he continually regurgetates a 1,000 times over.

LC: Sorry but that's how the truth works. No matter many how many times the story is told, it's the same every time. I'd be wary of someone who told a different story every time, as Steve did with the numbers from his hit counter.

Haggerty wrote: An amazing thing about it is that he fools people that appear to be more knowledgable than he (not that it would be that hard).

LC: How is it that I "fool people that appear to be more knowledgable" (sic) than I am? You can fool some of the people some of the time but no one can fool all of the people all of the time. Yet on forum after forum I've proven my expertise when called upon to do so, often at your expense.

Haggerty wrote: An analyisis: If you read Sgt. Castle's post you will see they are an attempt to show that he is a legitimate, honest police officer

LC: I have dozens of citations for bravery, dedication to duty, and good solid police work. I've received one of my Department's highest awards for my work. If you have any other information, let's hear it.

Haggerty wrote: with a great deal of experience in training dogs.

LC: This has all been covered in previous posts and anyone who cares to, can call the department.

Haggerty wrote: There is very little information put forth (good or bad and he seesm to prefer the latter)

LC: Odd but I didn't see a word about training or anything about GSD's in your post.

Haggerty wrote: Oh, by the way, he is the world's leading expert. On what? Like Prof. Irwin Corey------------everything.

LC: Far from it. I've been around for a time and know some things.

Haggerty wrote: Let's talk dawgs. Let's talk German Shepherds.

LC: I'm all for that. Notice that there isn't one word about GSD's in your post.

Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA
Uncllou@aol.com
For training articles go to www.loucastle.com

Re: Sgt. Castle

steveleigh
2004-09-21 20:44

LC: First, as to my title, I *am* a police sergeant and have been since 1973. right now I'm nearing the 29th year of law enforcement work. If you add in my military service, nearly 4 years in the Air Force, my length of service totals nearly four times yours.

But what about all those injuries, surgeries, disability, no duty, light duty, time off, doctors, hospitals, physical therapy? Do THEY count at all, Mr Voodoo Time Machine?

LC: As far as my "martyrdom" that's a term applied by your friend Steve after I detailed why I was not the K9 trainer for my department anymore.

There ya go, Voodoo! It's a page full of YOUR OWN WORDS. Not one word has been altered. *YOU* wrote it - *I* used it.

LC: It applies to everyone. But I realize the difference between a personal attack and a contradiction. The first contains name calling, as Steve has always done.

Yep - I've been calling you "Voodoo" for so long, the rest of the world has picked up on it. ROFLMAO!

LC: Anyone is encouraged to contradict me. I'm always willing to learn, but some people think they already know it all.

GREAT! I'M going to contradict you. I'm going to call you a CHRONIC, HABITUAL LIAR. And I'm going to PROVE that you are just that.

http://www.sl-prokeys.com/wffcw/index.htm

Just click on Voodoo Louie Castle, and start seeing PROOF.

LC: Sorry but that's how the truth works. No matter many how many times the story is told, it's the same every time. I'd be wary of someone who told a different story every time, as Steve did with the numbers from his hit counter.

Since they don't exist Voodoo, let's make a little test. Let's find out FOR SURE. Click the link above (terrifying as it may be) and open your little eyes. Click onto ANY page and open your little eyes. Scroll down to the bottom of the page and open your little eyes. Do you see the little gold numbers? The ones that don't exist on every page? Is it Voodoo? Then try this one Voodoo. Return to the menu, and click on the same page AGAIN. Did those little gold numbers increment by one? OMG! Voodoo - you're a GENIUS!

LC: You can fool some of the people some of the time but no one can fool all of the people all of the time.

LOL - you can't fool ME at ALL, Voodoo.

LC: I have dozens of citations for bravery, dedication to duty, and good solid police work. I've received one of my Department's highest awards for my work. If you have any other information, let's hear it.

Well Voodoo, if you have all these things you claim, why don't you scan them and place them on your "professional" website so we can ALL see them? Then your credibility might have some substance. After all, if *I* can forge letters, certificates, and newspaper articles, certainly YOU can, too.

LC: This has all been covered in previous posts and anyone who cares to, can call the department.

We already HAVE called, Louie.

Regards to you,
Steve Leigh
http://www.sl-prokeys.com/wffcw/index.htm
click on Voodoo Louie Castle and enjoy!!!

Re: Sgt. Castle

lou_castle
2004-09-21 21:28

Steve Leigh wrote: But what about all those injuries, surgeries, disability, no duty, light duty, time off, doctors, hospitals, physical therapy? Do THEY count at all, Mr Voodoo Time Machine?

LC: All of the injuries and the rest came after my 15 years of running the K-9 training and my 5 1/2 years of handling. That's been made quite obvious to you many times Steve.

Steve Leigh wrote: GREAT! I'M going to contradict you. I'm going to call you a CHRONIC, HABITUAL LIAR. And I'm going to PROVE that you are just that.

LC: This is just more of the same old insanity Steve. Doesn't prove a thing. You're still the obsessed one. You're still the psychotic one. You're still the stalker.

Steve Leigh wrote: Click onto ANY page . . . Scroll down to the bottom of the page and open your little eyes. Do you see the little gold numbers?

LC: What does your hit counter have to do with anything Steve? Except that you don't seem to be able to even quote it consistently to this list. And it's interesting that it records every hit even though it's from the same ISP isn't it. For all we know in the years that we've been talking, you could have gotten those numbers all by your self!

Steve Leigh wrote: LOL - you can't fool ME at ALL, Voodoo.

LC: Never needed to. Your lack of dog training knowledge has been pointed out repeatedly, both in our exchanges and again, right here.

Steve Leigh wrote: Well Voodoo, if you have all these things you claim, why don't you scan them and place them on your "professional" website so we can ALL see them? Then your credibility might have some substance. After all, if *I* can forge letters, certificates, and newspaper articles, certainly YOU can, too.

LC: My website, unlike yours, is almost completely about helping people in getting their dogs trained. I didn't put it together and don't even know how to modify it to include such things. I'll get around to it one day, but there's no need for it right now. There's about 11,000 words about training dogs and about 600 words about me. That's the way a real dog trainer has his website set up. Not with dozens and dozens of pages about other dog trainers, not with pages about doohickeys that improve the sound of organs, not about foxes, not with detailed suicide instructions, not with long rambling, boring stories about "his life in rock and roll," but about dog training. No need to apologize for disappointing me with the content of your website as you've done in the past; but I'm not the one making the claims that you're making. And the ones I am making, I've backed up with references. Still waiting for yours.

LC: I'm sure that people have noticed the rather complete absence of dog training information on your website from someone who claims to have run a professional dog training business for 21 years, titled many sport dogs and supplied and trained dogs for police departments.

LC: This has all been covered in previous posts and anyone who cares to, can call the department.

Steve Leigh wrote: We already HAVE called, Louie.

LC: Who's "we" Steve? Got a mouse in your pocket? I don't give a damn what *you* do, I'm telling people reading this that if they want to go to the source to do so. Anyone who takes your word for anything is listening to a psycho. But even if you weren't, you have just a *slight bias* against me. You're unable to hold your head up on MANY emails lists because you've been banned from so many of them after losing discussion after discussion with me. Even here, after a few invitations to discuss dogs and dog training you keep harping back on the same old, tired subject.

Regards,

Lou Castle, Los Angeles, CA
Uncllou@aol.com
For training articles go to www.loucastle.com

(Read comments) -

Navigate: