Meryl Dorey of the Australian anti-Vaccination Network published a blog post, yesterday, exposing the nastiness of those who would question her honesty, integrity, financial disclosure difficulties, and her underwhelming prowess in citing reputable evidence for her anti-vaccination campaign against the health of the children of Australia. I even got my *first ever tag* for this comment [Dorey's "medical qualification" is that she has "a brain"]:
That’s it? I got a whole tag for that? Oh well; at least “3 people” liked it.
Dorey starts out by stating that:
Time and time again, I am contacted by people who belong to Stop the Australian Vaccination Network (SAVN) and / or the Australian Skeptics asking why they are not allowed to post on our Facebook page, email discussion list, etc.
I’m not so sure how accurate this is, as we are talking Meryl Dorey here. I know that there are many, many, many people who are members of the Stop the AVN Facebook page who have been banned from AVN fora simply because they posted polite, evidence based comments on those fora. I’m one of them. I’ve never contacted Dorey to ask as to why I was banned. I have contacted Dorey for other reasons though.
I have commented on her blog, three times. None of these comments ever passed moderation. If she doesn’t publish it, she doesn’t have to respond, right? The first time I ever commented was on Dorey’s trilogy of deceit, Medical Power over the Innocent. Strangely, this trilogy is no longer available to view: it is locked down under password protection. I wonder why? This might be a reason:
The second and third times I commented on Dorey’s blog were in response to Dorey once again absolving herself of any responsibility in the harassment of the McCaffery Family. Maybe my comments were a bit close to the bone, so I can see why she wouldn’t want to respond:
I have also emailed Dorey.
Here is one I sent to her regarding her publication of comments on her blog, made by a troll intent on vilifying the McCaffery Family. I’m still gobsmacked that she even published a comment under the name “Dana Tierney”. Seriously, allowing a comment through which is an obvious attempt to cause grief and harm, by using the name of a deceased baby, is lower than we have come to expect from Dorey. Even when alerted to the hideousness of this action, Dorey refused to remove the comment. This is the email I sent her, knowing full well that she had been informed of the hideousness of the comments. Again, no response:
Another email I recently sent to Dorey regarding the repugnant actions of an AVN member, Andrew MacDonald, can be found here:
So, back to the Dorey blog post. Yes, she has included evidence of some C-bombs on the StopAVN page. Two, I think. In the eyes of the community the C-bomb still causes some consternation, no matter how used to it we are on the internet. Basically, C-bombs give her ammunition to write a blog post as she has done. They should be left out. The people who used them have retracted and apologised, as is proper. There are also some F-bombs, of which I have been guilty myself, in the past. I’ll probably drop the odd one in the future as well. This is Dorey’s biggest proof that StopAVN are uncivilised and unworthy of questioning her dishonesty. I hear a long bow being drawn somewhere. The use of profanities is a result of the sheer agitation of dealing with a dishonest ideologue with a flair for hubris. Nothing more; nothing less. I’m not excusing it: I’m explaining how it happens. People are humans too.
I’ll go through some examples Dorey has used as proof of the inhumanity of StopAVN. Better still, I’ll let the people outed by Dorey explain things themselves. Prepare for a cherry picking bonanza, folks. There may also be a healthy dose of deceit.
Dorey cites Ken McLeod in her post:
…their entire reason for being is to censor the AVN!) and denying them the right to free speech (again – a major irony fail since the original complaint against the AVN by Ken McLeod stated quite clearly that the AVN has no access to freedom of speech in Australia)
Dorey is not entirely accurate. I would even go so far as to call Strawman. StopAVN has no interest in “censoring” the AVN. StopAVN exists to show the wider community, and the media, that Meryl Dorey and her AVN are deceitful, wrong, poorly (and possibly fraudulently) administered, dangerous, wrong, deceitful, cruel, wrong, and wrong. This has worked: Dorey is now rightly a pariah in decent society, and mainstream media won’t touch her with a barge pole. I’ll let Ken explain how Dorey has misquoted him:
Dorey goes on to cite (from where?) comments from other members. The irony here - no, let’s call it bathos – is that these members are mocking Dorey’s previous wild accusations (never substantiated) of receiving death threats from StopAVN members. “Not a death threat” is now a StopAVN meme based on the past deceit of Meryl Dorey. The comments appear in isolation and, as is a theme of this Dorey post, are reproduced without context, or insight:
Michael Fitzpatrick Meh. All this means is the blade of the ( hypothetical, non death threatening) guillotine will take longer to arrive. It is still on it’s way.
Yesterday at 10:26am ·
Bill Bibb It may even be a larger blade (not a death threat)
Daniel Raffaele Might be a timely warning for AVN acolytes (not a death threat) 1000 ways to die Booby Trapped
http://www.youtube.com Unintented SPIKE. 1000 Ways to Die
Dorey cites another commenter, Sarah. Again, no context. Just a comment in isolation:
Sarah Norris I’d like to expose her to hendra virus
What is this even about? Luckily, Sarah can tell us. Sarah is talking about the cowardly troll , Holland. So, Dorey has picked out a comment made about one of the world’s worst people, and added it into her blog post, free of context, and honesty, because it made a point (regardless of the lack of integrity of including the comment). Here’s Sarah’s response:
Perfidy. Damn, I like that word.
Dorey includes this comment from Luci Baldwin:
Luci Baldwin Meryl deserves much worse – eg. suffering from an excruciatingly painful vaccine-preventable disease and realising that her homeopathic remedies (A.K.A plain water) cannot cure it.
Hang on a minute. I remember this comment. Luci Baldwin was roundly denounced for wishing this pain on anyone, even Meryl Dorey. Many commenters distanced themselves immediately from Luci’s comment, as it was in poor judgement and sorely lacking in any sense of ethical standing. I even experienced a barrage of bile from Luci and her husband for daring to point out that her comment was unethical. The point is: why hasn’t Dorey included the other comments, from many members, resoundingly admonishing Luci for her comment? Why indeed.
Dorey goes for another one of her old chestnuts; that being our old, pony-tailed chestnut Peter Bowditch:
Let’s not forget Peter Bowditch, the head ratbag over at the Skeptics, who said:
A polite message to Viera Scheibner and Bronwyn Hancock, following your appearance on 60 Minutes – fuck you to hell #StopAVN
What do you have when an anti-vaccination liar is burnt at the stake? A good start.
I mean, really; Peter has stated Ad nauseam that he does not represent the Australian Skeptics. Dorey knows this. This claim has been repeated, and corrected, so many times that one can only assume it to be a lie. Dorey knows it is untrue. Peter’s tweets, included here by Dorey, were made whilst watching two anti-vaccination liars lie on National television. These are people who defend child murderers. Anyway, if Dorey is not anti-vaccine, then, why is she offended at these tweets?
Dorey includes Dan Buzzard in her post:
Their attitude towards religion is every bit as intolerant as it is
towards those who want to make informed vaccination choices. From Dan Buzzard in WA who has a web page entitled Everybody Draw Mohammed which features pictures of the prophet Mohammed doing obscene things and totally denigrating Islam to stating the following about the
Daniel Buzzard 27.3.11 – Fuck the Catholic Church. Who dares me to walk into the Church service with these?
Number one: Everybody Draw Mohammed Day (and I don’t expect Dorey to grasp the concept, nor the irony of including this example), is a direct reaction to the attack on freedom of speech by religious fundamentalists who are using murder and other means to suppress the rights of individuals to criticise Islam. There is a growing concern across many nations that this freedom to criticise all religions is being eroded by various governments. Dorey should be supporting this movement (but, I can see how it would be inconvenient for her to acknowledge the importance of ensuring the right to criticise institutions such as religion, governments, pharmaceutical companies etc).
Number two: I had to search for Dan’s comment. I found it on Twitpic. Here’s the context: Dan is pictured holding two handwritten signs, across the road from a Catholic Church. Dan is highlighting the Catholic Church’s incessant failure to investigate the rape of children by its priests. Given the context, and the Catholic Church’s recalcitrance on this issue, I would have to say that Dan’s comment, now in context, has some gravity to it. I agree with Dan’s comment, now that it is in context. Here’s a portion of the photo:
If you have a look at Dan’s blog, you will see that he has mentioned the rape of children several times, including this one where he notes Dorey’s infamous post where she equated vaccination with the rape of a child. I can see why Dorey would be upset that someone else has mentioned the repugnance of paedophilia; only, in context, and accurately.
This is an important point: Dorey has really gone after Dan with some spurious and misguided attempts to discredit him: all based on deceit. In fact, Dorey has gone after several people who are intent on holding her to account. This post from Dorey was about payback. Dorey just wants to get them, and she doesn’t care if honesty gets thrown under the bus to do it.
What really sticks out, for me, is what is missing from Dorey’s post: there are countless occasions where Dorey has been called a liar, dishonest, inept etc; yet none of these screenshots made it into her post. Why, you ask? It is because whenever Dorey has been called a liar, dishonest, inept etc, there has been evidence to back up the claim. Why, I’ll even provide Dorey with a screenshot which she can include in her next post on this issue. And, you know what? I promise not to file a fraudulent DMCA takedown notice on her use of my screenshot.
The scorching irony (again, lost; or Dorey just doesn’t care), is that Dorey uses a screenshot taken from the StopAVN Facebook page: the very same thing for which she filed over fifty fraudulent copyright take-down notices (yet failed to substantiate any, when requested). My sides… No more…
To wrap up I want to highlight Dorey’s closing statements in the post:
The fact is that people who believe that a scientific disagreement
somehow gives them the right to abuse, bully and threaten others need some serious psychological help. I feel very sorry for them and in my kinder moments, I hope they will soon get the help they so obviously need.
This is a common claim from Dorey. She likes that moral high ground. But, watch out Meryl; the unstable ground can give out from under you without a moment’s notice. I always like to refer to this example, at a moment’s notice. The comments come from the same blog post. The first comment is from the main body. The second comment is from the comments section. Hypocrisy, thy name is Meryl Dorey:
Watch your step.