Thursday, October 11, 2007

The End of charlesmanson_and family


For those of you who still give a shit, I have had a link to the right for years saying "Losers Hang Out Here" or some shit. That linked to a Yahoo group wherein you would find on any given day Jimmy the stalker, Melton the registered sex offender, an illiterate old lady named Sharon who couldn't tell Melton from Melcher and a foul mouth fat wench named Cheryl. As they say on Law and Order, these are their stories. I now pronounce the group OVER!.


Old Coot Writes

HUN-- I am not even in charge of babysitting you anymore
YOU requested me to NOT EDIT your posts-
I don't usually reject posts- I EDIT them.
YOU don't want that done so I haven't
However, your veiled threat of *suggestion* to stop censoring you well HUN-- much as I luv yah and I know you luv me thing is-- YOUR account has been turned over to the other mod who, I might add, will NOT put up with ANY veiled threat suggestions.
I am sending this to her - you can voice your opinion with her OK>
I KNOW you are able to post decently- I have actually seen one or 2 that are decent - However,.they have never been in MY group.
My *suggestion* to you is -- stop with the veiled threats, stop with the attacks,
stop with this vendetta with Jimmy and Rabbit ON THE BOARD-- email them offlist and blast off. WE donot need to be a party to you and their fights.
Cheryl-is not as easy going as I am- only thing I have suggested to her is to NOT boot you from the group. However, she has a trigger finger.......LOL
.

Psycho Fat Woman Cheryl Chimes In

Kotex, she is right.
I will not tolerate your foul mouthed attitude.
You suggest we stop censoring you?
I suggest you stop sending things in that are in need of being censored.
You sure as hell don't pull the same shit in Heaven's group..why is that? Maybe because she won't put up with your crap?

Well guess what asshole..I won't either
You will no longer be the bully of our group
Try to bully me? I'll tell you right now...complete waste of my time as I'm not intimidated.
You've brought this entire censorship/moderate situation upon yourself after being told countless times to lay off your bully bullshit towards Rabbit, Jimmy and others and refusing to comply. You've no one to blame but yourself. So if you want to piss and moan and boo hoo over it to someone...get a mirror!
Don't like it..then you'd best make some changes.
Don't want to make changes, then maybe you'd be better off leaving the group.
Choose to stay and continue to send in your snide, pointless remarks towards others....they won't make it past my own eyes.
U are nothing more than a member of the group, you don't run the show, so abide by the rules or my itchey trigger finger just might be pointed at you!
Have a nice day loser!
Cheryl

Notice the insane ramblings of the pathologically fat? Notice how she calls names like she is a retarded 3 years old. Notice the threats and the delusions of grandeur.

Unfortunately for these two rejects, multiple members of their group ASKED today to have my posts forwarded to them. This, after Old Sharon offered it. But they won't get it because Fat Cheryl (who no man will love) declined to honor (she has none) Old Coot's request.

So here was my farewell to them

Let me explain what you have done.

Rather than allowing a free speech discourse to occur, whereby people can either read my posts and decide what they think or even choose to ignore my posts, you have instead censored my posts.

Then Sharon offered to provide my posts to those that asked. THREE of your members asked and inbred Cheryl changed the policy and said no.

You see, you think that life is about evenness. It isn't. Maybe Rabbitt will be thrown out of KTS maybe he won't. But he should be thrown out of your sinkhole because he is a LIAR and a pedophile.

Maybe Jimmy will be coming back, but he should be watched because he is a liar and unwell.

Maybe Christie is a nice person, but she is also an idiot and her ideas deserve mockery.

I haven't had to do anything. By muzzling me, lying to your members and treating them like children you have already proven yourselves to be unfit guardians of discussion. Your group is now over.

The Col Has Spoken

With their membership censored and ignored, it is now official- the LAMEST site on the web is now KAPUT!

50 comments:

catscradle77 said...

My brain hurts.

But I do believe someone made reference to censorship of the Colonel in the same light as someone screaming 'fire' in a theatre and how that is not allowed.

While verbally this argument soounds nice, it doesn't stand to reason. Yelling fire in the theatre does not fall into the same realm for screaming fire is that situation is not free speech nor considered free speech, because it's obvious intent is to do harm.

Thusly, while certain people can assume that the Colonel's words are meant to cause harm, his words are at least true.

So, the fire analogy is not a valid one in my book.

catscradle77 said...

And finally, since the words are true, how can they cause harm like screaming fire?

A.C. Fisher Aldag said...

Thank you, Colonel, prince amongst men, for letting me join your blog! Blessings. Now what your kind of pie would you like me to bake you?

deadwoodhbo said...

JUST FAB!!!!!!!! AWESOME COL!!!! thank you!!!!!!!!

deadwoodhbo said...

.C. Fisher Aldag said...
Thank you, Colonel, prince amongst men, for letting me join your blog! Blessings. Now what your kind of pie would you like me to bake you?

2:30 PM, October 11, 2007

well hello Charlie will be calling you soon let me know big hug becca.

A.C. Fisher Aldag said...

Thank you Becca, YOU ROCK! Warm soft hugs back at'cha! I received two wonderful calls for my birthday... but we were out, darn it! Missed 'em both, plz try again tonite.

But I promised the Colonel that I would not hijack his blog with all this tedious personal stuff, and I don't wish to get kicked off on my very first day, soooo... um, right back to topic:

Okay, so this charlesmanson_andfamily list is lame, full of Rabbitt droppings, censorship and inane commentary, I got that. It's justifiably dead in the water. What other sites are recommended? I've seen Cat's Cradle's, and the "best site on the web". Which sites are the most positive, fair, balanced, and interesting? Which ones to avoid like a South Central hooker? Which ones have shining gems of information, oh enlightened ones?

PS, Colonel, thank you again for allowing me to join, that was the second-best birthday present EVER. I feel like a member of an elite fraternity / sorority, the one with the really good beer!

deadwoodhbo said...

The Col is right cg group is terrible,i remember raven ane rabbit ,both claimed to have been on the ranch yet when you asked them when or what their real names were they would go crying to cg and you would get booted,it is the lamest site about manson on the net.I have always like this site the Col comes up with awesome post's .

Pristash said...

I'm not really sure what any of the post means, except that the lamest place on the web is now kaput! That's disconcerting. What site will labeled next be lamest? Mark Turner hasn't posted ina while...

Heaven said...

A.C. Fisher Aldag, welcome to the blog!

=)

Heaven said...

Mark runs a great site..

I think that he's just really busy with other stuff and only updates as things happen..

=)

deadwoodhbo said...

Heaven said...
Mark runs a great site..

I think that he's just really busy with other stuff and only updates as things happen..

=)

9:05 AM, October 12, 2007

I also like mark turners site,He has some great reading on there

A.C. Fisher Aldag said...

Heaven: Thanks for the welcome! Who is Mark Turner, and what is the name of his site? I came, I saw, I googled, and all that popped up were Mark Turners who were city councilmen, attorneys, or rap singers or something.

Anyone who ever read the defunct site: Does this Raven have long black hair, thin, tall, exotic dancer, Goth before Goth became stylish? If this is the same Raven, I don't know if her claims to ranchette status are valid, as she is only about five years older than I, which would have made her all of thirteen at the time of the unfortunate incidents... perhaps like our dear Ms. Murphy, she came along later.

IF, in fact, this is the same Raven, ask her if she recalls what the Rainbow Embroidery Society was doing in approximately March 1977... if she answers "Ice Cream Social" or "Checkers Tournament", we will know she is lying about any tenuous ties to "the Family". If she replies "Protesting animal cruelty at the pill factory", then at least one of us will know that she is telling the truth. Or perhaps a wee smidge of the truth, for her professed ranch habitation will still be under question.

If everyone who claimed to be at said ranch was actually there, it would've been wall-to-wall people, and the land would've sunk from the weight. It would be called the Barker crater.

And if anyone is actually speaking to, God forbid, White Rabbitt, I've heard that he is back in my home state of Michigan... which is not big enough for both he and I, so therefore he must leave. May I suggest Alabama? It's so lovely there in autumn.

Real name: Lawrence "Larry" Melton Jr., aka MUD.

Becca: Thank you so very much, and you know for what!!! :-) Does the SBC operator often cut you off like that? There I was, immersed in the profound wisdom of the universe, when... click. Over. Writing is more consistant. Plz gimme a holla.

Have a lovely weekend, one and all. --A.C.

Heaven said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
deadwoodhbo said...

If everyone who claimed to be at said ranch was actually there, it would've been wall-to-wall people, and the land would've sunk from the weight. It would be called the Barker crater.
AWESOME!

Heaven said...

deadwoodhbo said...
If everyone who claimed to be at said ranch was actually there, it would've been wall-to-wall people, and the land would've sunk from the weight. It would be called the Barker crater.
AWESOME!

11:55 AM, October 13, 2007


LOL Exactly!

Only on the world wide web can someone pretend to be Ruth Ann Morehouse and actually convince people it's true lol

agnostic monk said...

A.C. Fisher Aldag said...
>>>ask her if she recalls what the Rainbow Embroidery Society was doing in approximately March 1977

welcome A.C.

the above statement confuses me because based on what I've read, Ruthanne had disavowed the Family by something like 1974/5. She is quoted in newspaper articles (on cats' site) as stating that she grew terrified of the loyal girls on the outside. She was afraid Squeaky would kill her. And she was afraid of Manson's reach from the inside.

Of course I don't believe everything I read, though.

catscradle77 said...

I think the best overall Ruth Ann impersonator was Clark Ronson from the old Ronson board (for those who remember. He had Bill Nelson believing and publishing the Ruth Ann emails, and all drooling like a puppy.

And welcome to A.C.

It is a good thing not to believe everything you read Monk, for the 400 pound Martian baby on the front of the weekly rag in the supermarket would be enough to make me cry in real life.

Heaven said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
deadwoodhbo said...

Heaven said...
According to "Raven" she and Sandra are very good friends and Sandra advised her against going public with her identity lol

Que the Twilight Zone music..

=)

Yes i remember that .Why would anyone want to be these people?These people were not the best of people to begin with.who would want to pretend to be them?insane

catscradle77 said...

LOL.

From what I recall, Ruth was found because something in Red's apartment or something, after Red and the Ford thing. She had been living in Sacramento for a few years.(after moving to Vegas and getting married and divorced.) She claimed to have no contact with them at all. Fitzgerald represented Ruth when she was sentenced for the LSD Hamburger thing.

Heaven said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Heaven said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
catscradle77 said...

Can we please have another blog on the Hendrickson movie? Please...

A.C. Fisher Aldag said...

Well, the Raven I knew was into the Rainbow Lawn Tennis Society and Always Take Weekends Away, but she definately was NOT Ruth Ann... Raven looked totally different than Ruth Ann. For her to be Ruth Ann, it would require she lose seven inches of height and 20 lbs, and gain um, about ten to fifteen years in age.

But it may not be the same Raven. It's a rather common name, nowadays.

Agnostic Monk: Okay, I wasn't trying to establish that Raven was or was not actually Ruth Ann, but rather one of the Latter Day Rainbows, the gals that traveled about the countryside in the 70s, protesting nuke plants, pollution and factory farms, and promoting the environmental movement, and spreading the good and blessed word of Charles. This particular Raven also claimed to have been at the Ranch, using the name Raven... doubtful since she would have been, like, twelve at the time. Family yes, Ruth Ann no. And that is what I wanted someone to ask her; if she was really the Raven from Arcane Toucans Wearing Armani, or if she was a complete, utter, TOTAL fake.

Is that clearer, or even more cryptic?

Heaven: Ruth Ann was married when traveling with Charles? I thought she got married much later. I was under the impression that she was a BeauSoleil groupie when she was hanging out with Charles. Or do I have her confused with several other pretty girls?

Cat's Cradle: I don't believe that Ruth Ann tried to kill Barbara Hoyt by feeding her LSD. The weapon was actually that hamburger. Really. Death by red meat. I've always wondered about that; most of the ladies were / are vegetarians. It seems quite out of character to attempt to administer poison via a hamburger. Why not slip that mickey into a plate of brown rice?

Becca: S'matter with your phone?

Everyone: Thank you for the many wonderful and warm welcomes! Please feel free to e-mail me off list. I enjoy cute little dancing teddy bears, chain letters, jokes, pictures of kittens, yes, REALLY I do. But I enjoy reading genuine conversation even more. Especially you, Becca, because the potential for phone tag is too gruesome. Also, if folks e-mail me off list, I won't get in horrid trouble with the good Colonel for ranting about my worthy yet tiresome causes, and get myself banished to blog limbo.

aldagffhaine@btc-bci.com

Thanks again!

catscradle77 said...

ROFLMAO A.C.

Yes most of the girls seemed committed to the veggie way, but didn't Charlie run off and eat meat?

And I still don't get Barbara and her time of death on Shorty. Unless she had to corroborate Ruby Pearl's time, for Ruby said the last time she saw Shorty was in the evening as well.

Heaven said...

A.C. Fisher Aldag
Heaven: Ruth Ann was married when traveling with Charles? I thought she got married much later. I was under the impression that she was a BeauSoleil groupie when she was hanging out with Charles. Or do I have her confused with several other pretty girls?



Manson told her that if she wanted to travel with him, she'd have to get married. Not exactly sure why, he had lots of underaged girls with him. Might have been cause Ruth's father didn't like his daughter hanging out with Manson at first and Charlie didn't want any trouble..

So she married a bus driver named Huebelhurst. There seem to be variations on how the last named is spelled. But it's the name she gave the police when the ranch got raided.

Gyspy and Leslie were Bobby's girls. He dumped them off on Manson..

=)

catscradle77 said...

Okay-what I have on it, is on May 20, 1968 in Santa Cruz, Ruth married Edward L. Heuvelhorst. She was 16 and he was 23.

When did Ruth hop on the bus?

A.C. Fisher Aldag said...

Interesting.

I can address the meat issue -- having just gotten chided for nearly five minutes of precious, expensive-as-diamonds Global SBC airtime for continuing to eat the "poisoned flesh" of our beloved animal friends. (Okay, who narked on me?) Charles does not eat meat. Sugar, sugar, sugar, and more sugar. You would think they would have to scrape him off the ceiling, after consuming all that sugar. Which would prolly rack up yet another rules violation. The dentist at CSP-Corc just threw himself off a bridge in despair.

Anyway.

The whole Ruth Ann marriage thing sounds to me like the Hillbilly Final Solution: "Marry 'em off quick". I remember now, she was the girl who had the Christian minister father who took LSD and traded his dear daughter for drugs. Then got all up in Charles's face about it afterward. Riiight.

And didn't Bobby have *three* fair and lovely maidens at his disposal?

catscradle77 said...

Okay, because of the missives on the case had Charlie running off to consume meat/steak/burgers or something. I forget which one, they all kinda blend together in a big lump after you read so many. On the pier or something, it sparks a brief flicker???

So, thanks for the clarification on that.

And I think that there was a woman named Gail as well that travelled with Bobby.

A.C. Fisher Aldag said...

Ruth Ann Morehouse Heuvelhorst.

(Snort) And I thought *I* had an ugly name. Alice Carole Fisher Aldag.

Blimey, no wonder she was called Ouisch. Nobody could've said "Ruth Ann Morehouse Heuvelhorst" with a straight face! Especially not when trippin'.

deadwoodhbo said...

Charlie did run of but not to consume meat ,i would say more to consume tuna...thanks to all the posts are great:P:P:P.

catscradle77 said...

I would have been stuck in kindergarden learning how to spell that for 3 years...

A.C. Fisher Aldag said...

Cats' Cradle: One of the missives on the case appears to be untrue. Several of the missives of the case also state that Charles masterminded various and sundry heinous crimes. Also not true, because:

1.) There's no physical evidence
2.) There's conflicting testimony from the various associates
3.) The various associates have changed their stories repeatedly
4.) With all due respect to Charles in his infinite wisdom, he couldn't manage to "mastermind" a trip to the laudromat, and
4.) Because he says so. And that's darn well good enough for me.

But take into account that I am a brainwashed and gullible cult follower. So much so that I'm off to fry up some nice, greasy bacon. Don't tell on me. :-)

catscradle77 said...

Ummm...you can tuna piano but you can't tuna fish...

Laughing...thanks deadwood...

catscradle77 said...

Hell scrambling some eggs...muttering what bacon?

Hell, good argument, and yes they have changed their stories.

And cult-smult, pass the bacon..

A.C. Fisher Aldag said...

Becca: Didja get your phone fixed yet? Please read your e-mail!!!

catscradle77 said...

A.C.said; 4.) Because he says so. And that's darn well good enough for me.

With no disrespect meant, why do you believe just because he said so,it makes it true?

A.C. Fisher Aldag said...

Cat's Cradle:

Because Charles does not lie.

Okay, you may take into consideration my status as a brainwashed cultist and my thoroughly questionable sanity... but I believe this to be true with all my heart.

At risk of inflicting severe, agonizing tedium on the noble members of the OTLMB...

Charles is a shaman, a dream-talker, a spirit-traveler, which in our language is called a Gwyddon. (Pronounced Goo-wiTH-on. The Cymraeg language is funny that way.) Now, it states in the authorized Gwyddon book of regulations that one may not lie. A shaman may use metaphor and allegory to the point that nobody else can understand him. A shaman may indulge in long stream-of-consciousness ramblings. A shaman may dance beguilingly around the truth. But a shaman may not actually lie. Otherwise he loses all his power in the spirit world, and quite possibly his shamanic union card.

An untruthful Gwyddon would be like a fish who flies, a ballerina who eats chocolate cake, a rap star who drives an Oldsmobile, a wind that doesn't blow, an anomaly that would make the whole universe collapse. Or something. A Gwyddon is not really capable of lying. Any more than a child who is just learning to talk.

This provides for some rather uncomfortable social situations and unsuccessful parole hearings. A three-year-old will tell Aunt Marge that she is really fat. A spirit-talker will tell the board that after he is paroled, he intends to sit in the desert, strum his guitar, and commune with the crows. It's a bit too truthfulness for most people to handle.

Charles was born a Maddox. (Also spelled Maddoc, Mathock, Mattock, and charmingly enough, Maddawg.) This is a Cymraeg (Welsh) name. My husband and I have Maddoxes on both sides of our family, so Charles is quite possibly related to us, as we are all as inbred as Siamese cats. Most of the Maddoxes are A.) Gwyddon B.) Crazy C.) Thieves and D.) Have wretchedly bad teeth.

But they do not lie.

catscradle77 said...

A.C.-Thank you for that clarification.

But by dancing around what we know to be the truth, isn't that propagating a lie? And yes a snitch is a snitch in all means, so I mean that on a different level.

And I pass no judgement on what people believe, for who is to say what I believe is the truth, and to condemn someone for their own thought is just plain wrong. My thought is no better or less than anyone elses, it is what is it, my thought. What is true in my world, may not be in someone elses.

Pristash said...

Sorry, a.c. you're description reminds me of Rainman. I buy autism before shamanism.

agnostic monk said...

a shaman? charlie was a conman, perfectly capable of lying without blinking. the various changing stories of the convicted murderers doesn't let him off the hook as far as I am concerned. I think he knew darn well what he was doing and was well aware of the degree of persuasion he possessed.

this is just my read, no offense meant to anyone here including AC.

deadwoodhbo said...

I have to speak my mind.....I dont mean to offen anyone on this site,but i do believe charlie is guilty ,he has already told he did the creppy crawley night vists,his reason if the guards in prison can invade his cell ,that gives him the right to invade others homes.Thats just my veiw and yes my spelling sucks sorry to all.

catscradle77 said...

No offense taken, and no offense meant by the following.

Charlie breaks the law and gets put in prison-his cell gets tossed, so it gave him the right to invade peoples homes?

How can the former, not being done, give an okay to do an act previously committed? In other words, how can tossing his cell (done after) him breaking the law and creepy crawling be held as a reason to do something?

He may consider prison his "home" but would not have ended up there without committing an act that was against the law, the creepy crawled home dwellers had not committed any act against the law. (or any acts that they may have been in prisoned for at that moment)

deadwoodhbo said...

catscradle77 said...
No offense taken, and no offense meant by the following.

Charlie breaks the law and gets put in prison-his cell gets tossed, so it gave him the right to invade peoples homes?

How can the former, not being done, give an okay to do an act previously committed? In other words, how can tossing his cell (done after) him breaking the law and creepy crawling be held as a reason to do something?

He may consider prison his "home" but would not have ended up there without committing an act that was against the law, the creepy crawled home dwellers had not committed any act against the law. (or any acts that they may have been in prisoned for at that moment)

2:01 AM, October 16, 2007

Charlie said way before he ever met these kids he was in and out of prison 1950s,this has nothing to do with the so called manson error,this goes back to when he was at boys school ,and he went to prison for cashing a stolen check,the guards would sneak though all his things and he hated it,so in later years he gave back what he got.Dam women the man had a life before the infamous manson years.

catscradle77 said...

Yes he did. But he broke the law, and ended up in a boys home. The people whose houses he tossed were living on their own property, not bothering him.

A friend of mine (rest his soul) was a Vietnam Veteran, Green Beret, ex-POW. He went to go file for benefits that he deserved and since he was over in Cambodia and Laos (by order) when we weren't supposed to be, his official paperwork said that he got hurt in a rollerskating accident, and he was denied. Yet, he didn't go and do illegal things.

If we are to believe that getting ones cell tossed cuz you end up in prison for breaking the law, gives you permission to go do things to innocent citizens in their homes, where exactly is the line drawn for order in the world?

deadwoodhbo said...

If we are to believe that getting ones cell tossed cuz you end up in prison for breaking the law, gives you permission to go do things to innocent citizens in their homes, where exactly is the line drawn for order in the world?

4:28 AM, October 16, 2007
I understand now what your getting at sorry takes me a while:P .It gave him no right at all i agree however in his mind it did.

catscradle77 said...

Sometimes I wander off, lol, when the straighest route would be effective.

A.C. Fisher Aldag said...

My, haven't you all been busy little beavers in my brief absence!

No offense given or taken from anyone, rest assured. Merely a variety of considered and worthy opinions to contemplate. It reminds me of the stimulating conversation found at an urbane cocktail party, although I needn't wear any uncomfortable high heels, or be forced to endure tinkly piano music. So pour us each a sour apple martini, and let us continue our discussion, shall we?

Home invasion, breaking and entering, and theft are not the equivalent of perpetrating nine grisly murders. A B&E is punishable by around five years in the general population. Even accessory to murder after the fact will only garner a mere fifteen or so years of incarceration, again in general pop.

Charles has been incarcerated for 35 years, much of it in special iso, and much of it in the "hole", for murders that there is no evidence he committed. (ooh, that was gramatically tricky, but ya'all knew what I meant.)

Charles is a political prisoner. Charles was incarcerated because the corporations wished to gut the environmental movement, as the executives do not wish to be deprived of their Porsches and yachts, at the expense of a little inconvenience such as undrinkable ground water. Charles was prosecuted for murder in the first place because Mr. Bugliosi was vying for the position of governor and chief bigd*ck of the state of California, and needed a pulpit to pound. Charles was imprisoned because he renounced the acquisition of wealth, and therefore couldn't afford a competent attorney. Charles was incarcerated because of the misogynistic notion that women cannot make rational decisions for themselves, nor are they capable of murder, hence they must've been compelled by a charismatic MALE leader, or they would've just stayed home and cooked pasta. Charles is being punished because he won't make nice with the parole board, admit guilt, and offer condolences to the victims' families for crimes that he did not personally commit.

Agnostic Monk said: "I think he knew darn well what he was doing and was well aware of the degree of persuasion he possessed."

Yes, indeed Charles has considerable persuasive capabilities. Only yesterday, when he called and I wasn't home, he attempted to cajole my beloved daughter into throwing out all the cleaning fluids under the kitchen sink, as they are polluting the well water, leaching into Lake Michigan, and poisoning all the fish that I so selfishly insist on feeding to my family, at the expense of their health and well-being. Now, my beautiful daughter is of the same age as the "kids" were during That Unfortuate Time in History. She has dealt with much hardship in her short life. She is part of a subculture that makes the mainstream turn green and gasp for breath. Yet she was not compelled or persuaded to do much of anything that Charles requested. She replied, "Yes sir, Mr. Manson, I will take that into consideration, thank you for your concern", and then changed the subject to tattoos or skate boarding or thrash metal music or something.

Now, one may conclude that Charles's persuasive powers are on the wane. Or, one might assume that my daughter, flower of my heart, has more self-esteem than Patricia Krenwinkle (I can only hope). OR, one may attribute her reply to a judicious use of plain old COMMON SENSE.

Cat's Cradle: You asked about the difference between dancing around the truth, complete forthrightness, and a lie. This is an example:

Lie: "Yes sir, Mr. Manson, I'll get right on that, I'm dumping all the Pine Sol and Ajax into the recycle bin immediately."
Truth: "Are you crazy, Charles? If I throw away all the cleaning products, I won't have to worry about the Manson Family, because my DAD will kill me!"
Dancing gently around the truth: What she actually did.

Have a pleasant day, everyone!

catscradle77 said...

Okay-that is day to day affairs etc. (which one could argue the environmental issues, but at this juncture I am not going to venture there).

But the little dance on the cleaning products doesn't really have the effect of the dance of the lie that effects others by projecting onto them things that may not be true, thusly effecting their paths.

That is the dance of the lie of which I was questioning.

Small little dances, while yet the lie, that are more done in common courtesy, than the others done to move oneself forward or to protect oneself.

If one has the truth that can affect a lot of lives and clarify issues, is one not bound to speak the truth than to dance the lie?

A.C. Fisher Aldag said...

Golly, I surely did not intend to overwhelm the comments department here at the OTLMB with my ramblings, nor stray so wildly far afield of the current topic, nor inflict my severe case of expository trauma syndrome on the good and gentle readers herein. So I will hereby SHUT UP now!