Author Topic: Michael Dimonds "MHFM" Reckless Driving Reported to Sheriff (Read 8205 times)

lewis · « **on:** May 08, 2011, 08:41:24 PM »

Came across this on Michael Dimond's hidden life . . . it is evidence in a big court case brought against him for being a fraud. Exhibit A has detail on this non-monk's sedate driving antics . . . recent crash . . . also goes into Michael Dimond's dirty bathroom with gross old dental floss and trash rotting in it. See Attachment:

Darcy · « **Reply #1 on:** May 08, 2011, 10:35:37 PM »

Darcy · « **Reply #2 on:** May 09, 2011, 01:13:48 PM »

I have lots of questions but on this hot topic that most won't touch with a ten foot pole, I have only one...

how does a 22year old have $1.5 million dollars?
:shocked:

My inclination is to be charitable towards the Brothers.

s2srea · « **Reply #3 on:** May 09, 2011, 01:53:48 PM »

Quote from: Darcy

I have lots of questions but on this hot topic that most won't touch with a ten foot pole, I have only one...

how does a 22year old have $1.5 million dollars?
:shocked:

My inclination is to be charitable towards the Brothers.

Of course you actually have to be a real "Brother" first right?

Darcy · « **Reply #4 on:** May 09, 2011, 02:39:58 PM »

I capitalized Brothers as in a name, not necessarily a title.

They are not my cup of chai but my satandar just doesn't go off with them.
:devil2:

Anyway, I am here because of :heretic: and :heretic:.

Quote

You're a :heretic:
No you're a :heretic:
I know you're a :heretic: but what am I.

:stare:

its not 1.5 million but upwards of 1.6 million.

Raoul76 · « **Reply #5 on:** May 09, 2011, 06:12:03 PM »

Through an inheritance, Darcy.

Or else he was one of those young CEOs they put on the cover of Business Week, but they're almost always Jєωs. It's sort of a taunt to make everyone else kill themselves trying to be multi-millionaires at 19, thinking there's something wrong with them if they aren't.

Quite admirable that he was willing to at least temporarily give up so much money to be a monk, too bad he was young and gullible and couldn't see they weren't real monks. He could have just taken his money and built himself his own makeshift monastery, why did he have to be with the Dimonds?

Raoul76 · « **Reply #6 on:** May 09, 2011, 06:19:14 PM »

Getting off topic a bit, speaking of young rich people, what is with all of this Mark Zuckberg stuff, why did they make a movie about him as if he is unique? Does anyone remember that before Facebook there was Friendster? And before that, it was MySpace... THESE SITES ARE ALL THE SAME. Also, Facebook is wretched and overrated, it's glitchy, the interface stinks. Every time someone writes a comment, someone I know, it sends me an E-mail, cluttering up my inbox, as well as making my phone beep loudly in the middle of the night.

What exactly is the big innovation behind Facebook? There isn't one. Two years from now Facebook will be forgotten and we'll have the same site with a new name.

Back to the Dimonds --

s2srea · « **Reply #7 on:** May 09, 2011, 06:25:08 PM »

Quote from: Raoul76

What exactly is the big innovation behind Facebook? There isn't one. Two years from now Facebook will be forgotten and we'll have the same site with a new name.

Back to the Dimonds --

And getting back off topic- The big innovation- they've figured a way to use FB to invade your privacy- which is why I stay away. I don't think it'll be forgotten so easily- if it is, its only because they've got an identical or better site to target advertise us with... Thats all.

Raoul76 · « **Reply #8 on:** May 09, 2011, 06:29:56 PM »

Lewis, it's Frederick Dimond, not Michael, who was accused of driving recklessly... By Eric Hoyle.

Also, you're David Hobson, aren't you? May want to change your style with the fonts.

Raoul76 · « **Reply #9 on:** May 09, 2011, 06:32:10 PM »

Our privacy no longer exists and hasn't existed for some time, s2srea. No reason to be paranoid about that anymore, we're all watched all the time.

s2srea · « **Reply #10 on:** May 09, 2011, 06:43:16 PM »

I'm not paranoid- I'm just not going to make it easier for someone to spam me.

Jitpring · « **Reply #11 on:** May 09, 2011, 07:13:23 PM »

Is the original post an example of detraction?

TKGS · « **Reply #12 on:** May 09, 2011, 08:21:31 PM »

Quote from: Jitpring

Is the original post an example of detraction?

Yes. I was going to post that, but you beat me to it.

SJB · « **Reply #13 on:** May 10, 2011, 08:51:38 AM »

Quote from: TKGS

Quote from: Jitpring
Is the original post an example of detraction?

Yes. I was going to post that, but you beat me to it.

Is the reference to the public record detraction?

TKGS · « **Reply #14 on:** May 10, 2011, 12:27:33 PM »

Quote from: SJB

Quote from: TKGS
Quote from: Jitpring
Is the original post an example of detraction?

Yes. I was going to post that, but you beat me to it.

Is the reference to the public record detraction?

Even reporting the public record is detraction if there is no need to report it to those who do not know. Report on their faulty theology and their penchant for "excommunicating" everyone on earth all you want. This is relevant. But I am absolutely certain that some saints may not have been perfect drivers and had poor personal hygene habits. On that last issue, just consider the Desert Fathers.

Yes. I think this entire topic is simply a matter of detraction.