If you are going to be a true scholar of the TLB case you need to read all the major books, and then decide that they are all wrong.
I mean the facts may indeed be accurate but the conclusions are at best muddled.
Everyone, even the BUG, is a human being. We see things the way we see things. Doesn't mean we are right or wrong, it just means we are fallible people.
People who come on here or visit Liz and try and tell us that "this is absolutely true " because they read it in the BUG'S novel or Sanders said something, they actually make me sick.
When someone shares their version of reality, a true researcher asks themselves "What do they gain from this spin."
No one can be trusted regarding TLB. NO ONE.
112 comments:
No one can be trusted on TLB???...Hmmmmm...of course, that includes yourself right?
word-up!
I don't know that you need to read ANY of the books. You'd probably do better looking at court transcripts, autopsy and coroner reports, etc. And then read even those with a critical eye.
I'm right behind Col on this - most people posting here (and on EvilLiz) post either speculative crap or trivial gossip. Mostly both.
People who come on here or visit Liz and try and tell us that "this is absolutely true " because they read it in the BUG'S novel or Sanders said something, they actually make me sick.
When someone shares their version of reality, a true researcher asks themselves "What do they gain from this spin."
--------------------
Hear hear!
Evil Liz steals Facebook pictures from family members.
In addition, she pretends to get letters from family members when in fact, she's getting nasty e-mails for her to stop invading people's privacy.
The bloggers on Evil Liz are stupid. 80% of them don't even know the case. They are, I'm assuming, a bunch of kids that just read some blurb on You Tube and came over to her blog.
If you questioned any of them, they would come up with a shrug.
How do you "steal" something that's posted on Facebook?
hippichick40 said:
How do you "steal" something that's posted on Facebook?
------
On an apple, you just click and drag to the desktop... not sure about windows :-) sorry, I couldn't resist...
>>>Hippiskank said: How do you "steal" something that's posted on Facebook?>>>
Were you born yesterday? People have been stealing off Facebook for a long time now.
Jesus, do I have to wipe your butt and cream your carrots????
see, RIGHT THERE, melee. is why fewer and fewer folk come to these blogs. Why so freakin nasty?? Hippiechick was asking a legit question, i.e., if something is posted on Facebook it is in the public domain and thus can't be "stolen".
are you really that self-rightous and miserable a person that you have to be so rude?
I think "downloading" is a more accurate term than "stealing".
Let's face it, as soon as something has been posted to facebook, the rights to it have already been signed away. Oh sure, you may retain copyright to it but Facebook (the corporation) can do what they want with it... in perpetuity.
And as Leary7 very rightly says " it is in the public domain and thus can't be "stolen""
And as Leary7 also very rightly says "Why so freakin nasty?? "
What's the matter, Melee? Got some kinda personal history with Hippychick40 that we don't know about? Catch a nasty social disease off her or something... or are you just an inherently rude, unfriendly prick?
Save it for the schoolyard, dude... that's about where it belongs.
Internet photos on Facebook and elsewhere are not legally in the public domain.
I defer to you on that one Col.
I just assumed they were. My bad. But it does seem illogical to put something out on the internet for any and all to see and then claim privacy. But then Spock doesn't write the law.
and thanks brownrice. you have been my favorite poster ever since I started reading the TLB blogs a year or so ago. Just because it is a Manson blog doesn't mean we have to abandon civility. gracias
and I confess to being one of the posters who doesn't know one tenth about TLB that the Col and Liz and Katie and others know. Obviously, that is the very reason I come here - to learn.
That is the part of the Col I have never understood - why start a blog about a subject and then denounce and often degrage anyone who comes to observe and learn. Makes no sense.
typo....degrade
ColScott said:
Internet photos on Facebook and elsewhere are not legally in the public domain.
------------------------
Yeah... you're right, Col.
Damn! Now I'll get called a sycophant...
it does seem illogical to put something out on the internet for any and all to see and then claim privacy.
But they don't. They limit it to people they accept as friends. That's why Evilliz et al are such vermin - they befriend people just to rip off their pics.
Scum I say.
Yee Ha! Another Poirot & Monkey led brawl in the making. Let the MPD games begin!
Come on ColScott, eat some Froot Loops and bring out Vera and Dickhead, I'm bored!
speculative crap, trivial gossip and mindless blather ...
Melee 1969, rather than being rude, and calling names, please consider what is actually being said.
Something cannot be "stolen" that is posted to a public forum without copyright, then shared on another public forum without copyright. Both are thereby placed in the public domain.
That's like "stealing" air.
If someone has a private page, has posted copyright, and has watermarked their photos, then perhaps it might be considered stolen if reposted, but don't count on a small claims court to offer you any compensation for it.
Col, items posted to a public page on a social media site such as FB by the original owner of the photo, music file, graphic, or written statement, without written copyright notice or ownership notice, and with no notice about their re-posting or use, are in fact placed in the public domain.
Another fight that Ace won outside of court. :-)
But AC, Facebook is not in the public domain - quite the opposite. You have to convince someone you are their friend to have access to their Wall and photos. That's why it sucks - I know from experience that Liz has befriended people to have access to the photos on their Facebook pages. EvilLiz is well named, I fear .. and quite possibly has no conscience about what she does.
As for the other toadies from her blog who have started hanging around here, all I can say is that this was a much better blog before you all showed up.
Leary says:
and I confess to being one of the posters who doesn't know one tenth about TLB that the Col and Liz and Katie and others know.
Col knows a lot, Katie not much, is learning but can't articulate and Liz knows f*#k all
C'mon Scroteus, you can do better than that. It's likely that you are one of the turd-sniffers that Liz & Company won't allow to comment any longer because you are ... well ... insane.
Her blog is a much better place because people like you are gone.
It's likely that you are one of the turd-sniffers that Liz & Company won't allow to comment any longer because you are ... well ... insane.
Her blog is a much better place because people like you are gone.
Can you not see the lapse in logic here? You postulate (It's likely that) and then take your own hypothesis as true people like you are gone.
About the intellectual level of that blog, I would say ...
Scroteus, it is your sanity that is at issue, but ok I'll bite.
I said, "It's likely that you are one of the turd-sniffers that Liz & Company won't allow to comment any longer".
I followed by saying that "Her blog is a much better place because people like you are gone".
You are the intellectually deficient turd-sniffer that made the definitive connection to yourself, thereby confirming that you are indeed a reject.
I have a date. See y'all later!
Hey Proteus, who died and put you in charge?
I've forgotten more about this case than you'll ever know, dickwad.
Col, you said:
"People who come on here or visit Liz and try and tell us that "this is absolutely true " because they read it in the BUG'S novel or Sanders said something, they actually make me sick."
I'm not sure what that means. What exactly are you trying to convey?
On Liz's blog, for the most part, they post pictures of structures, buildings or landscape that use to house certain family members, or otherwise have to do with this case.
That's not an opinion....it's a fact.
Are you saying they are basing these addresses on "the BUG's novel" or "Sanders said something"?
Please clarify.
lol Katie // Just what is legal and not legal as regards to the Inet is a very fuzzy law at best. Just the phase you use "Internet Photos" ... combined with the rest of your statement makes no sence and shows just how little you understand about law.
>>>Louise365 said: Just what is legal and not legal as regards to the Inet is a very fuzzy law at best. Just the phase you use "Internet Photos" ... combined with the rest of your statement makes no sence and shows just how little you understand about law.>>>
Louise, I have no idea what you are talking about. I didn't use the phrase "internet photos".
In fact, that isn't a phrase, it's just two words.
If you are referring to previous discussions regarding pictures on Facebook, I didn't even mention that.
But I'll explain my viewpoint on that.
On most Facebook pages, there are no restrictions because people either don't want to include them, or don't know how to.
As to the Family Members pictures taken off Facebook, I'm not a lawyer nor am I someone in charge of the law.
Whether or not they are public domain is not up to me.
It may not be against the law to take pictures off Facebook, it may be a moral question.
But that isn't what I'm arguing at this point. I'm arguing the Col's statement that he is saying that people at Liz's site are going by The Bug's novel or by Sanders as to opinion.
And my argument is that an address can't be an opinion. It's a fact.
Now sober up and join the conversation or get outta here.
Hey Proteus, where are you? Are you hiding now? Are you in mommy's basement playing Atari?
I know who you are. And you had no business insulting me.
You dragged me into this mess. Now explain and fix it.
Let's see your face now.
Proteus said...
But AC, Facebook is not in the public domain - quite the opposite. You have to convince someone you are their friend to have access to their Wall and photos
Hey Jackass, a person has to set their privacy/security settings in order for someone to befriend them in order to access their wall and photos. in a lot of cases you can see a persons photos,wall, and info without befriending them....but what would a loser like you know about having friends anyway
People with real friends don't need shit like facebook anyway.
I have no interest in participating in any pissing contests. Also, I like many of the people on this thread (except maybe him, himself & Irene). So, I'll only say this once.
Only SOME of the current Family member photos originated on social media sites. Some. I know that for a fact, and I will not offer proof. If social media sites were the primary source, there wouldn't be much to show. So, debate away if you wish but it is much ado about nothing. Farts in the wind.
I also know for a fact that Liz will not display anything that she thinks was "lifted" from another Manson forum.
As far as "Irene" goes, this person is emotionally unstable. Suze is correct, he is not allowed to comment on Eviliz any longer. The reasons are many, but the main ones are overt anti-semitism and an unhealthy obsession with The Col. He has also communicated death threats to us.
Take my words for what you think they are worth.
I think it is worth pointing out that Liz is the one name you never see in any of this...
She always manages to stay above it...
which to me - shows class...
If you were a part of that group of people who walked around with an X shaved in your head laughing into TV cameras, and dancing around signing in front of people who just lost there family members to your friends...
If you were one of that group of people who made movies and held guns in front of cameras shouting threats, and mocking people you had harmed for life...
If you were one of that group of people who helped hide a dead persons belongings and contributed to the deaths of ZERO or the Willetts in ANY WAY...
I hope you never get any privacy
I hope your life has been as difficult as hell. you have the right to absolutely nothing in my opinion. your like animals and that is how you be treated- locked up in cages to be looked at with curiosity by strangers ... Like Circus freaks- which in my opinion is much closer to what you are than human,
If the victims were my family I would spend the money to follow you around with Nancy Grace/ Geraldo Rivera and TV cameras for the rest of your life.
Facebook and such is NOTHING compared to the time and money I would spend to make sure you never got one second of peace in your entire life...
So maybe a few photos aren't that bad when you think about it...
I have said before- I personally wouldn't post someone else's pictures without there permission.
But I dont question anyone else who does, and I have no pity for these fools. They wanted plenty of attention at one time- and it is too bad that they cant decide when they want us to forget how hard they tried to make sure we never would....
of course- this is just my own opinion....
Col- you may not give a frogs fat ass about my opoinion- lol
But I am grateful for you, your blog, and the fact that you never stop me from expressing it
:)
As far as I am concerned anyone dumb enough to post their entire life and pics on a 'social networking' site like Facebook has no reasonable expectation of privacy as everyone knows how easy it is to access so called 'private' information.
It seems to me, for the most part Facebook is a place full of desperate, disenfranchised sheeple looking for attention or a distraction... and like do you really need to post 68 pics of yourself?? It plays on people's vanity and insecurities and its sad.
Lets be honest, Facebook is not about 'social networking' its about social engineering. Its about monitoring and keeping tabs on the public, its about social control and conformity... its sheer brilliance and the sheeple bought it hook line and sinker...way to go.
When you look at the big picture its pretty disturbing. I oppose self surveillance and this surveillance society in general. I know I am not alone and I know who is to blame.
I almost forgot this most important thing as I got sidetracked with my Facebook rant..you see I am in the process of working on something about Facebook which I am tentatively calling "While You Were Fucking Around On Facebook Newt Gingrich Became Your New President"...hahaha but enough of that....
More importantly...so PROTEUS is Monkey Boy?? nice..jig is up again Jimmy...listen bro I know that Elenin was supposed to take us all out and that you still must be harbouring all kinds of disappointment about it not happening but tell me is the Col and the Hollywood illuminati fake alien invasion still a go??
Sorry to disappoint, but I am not Savage (although I've been around this blog as long as he has). Look at my posts - you'll find I don't support any crazy theories - all I've done is suggest a bit of discipline in keeping to the point, dissed most of the books about Manson (and one or two people posting here).
Oh, yes, I've expressed unhappiness about posting of present-day pics on Liz's blog.
Hardly argumentative, JimNY stuff really, is it?
Not my fault if some people post absurd comments here, or that Katy can't control her temper. But believe me, Jim is both sick and dangerous, to himself and possibly to others - but he's not me.
leary said >>>Hippiechick was asking a legit question, i.e., if something is posted on Facebook it is in the public domain and thus can't be "stolen".<<<<<
Hi Leary, isn't there a difference between public and public domain...public domain being work, photos, books where the copyright has expired?
If so, photos on Facebook would be in the public as opposed to in the public domain...and subject to copyright laws. So if you want to use it, get permission and offer to pay for its use. No?
Katie, just the fist two words of my response back there was directed at you. The rest of it was meant for His MajestyCol.
Louis365, I think I called you Louise. Sorry.
Anywho, I didn't understand your comment. I thought you were saying I don't know anything about the law.
Which I don't. HA HA.
Sorry if I directed anger at you. I was kinda curious as to why you were attacking me. :)
Hey has anybody seen Proteus?
Look under the slide. HA HA.
Why the gratuitous attacks, Katie? Just because I questioned the depth of your knowledge about the case doesn't need to trigger an onslaught of malicious mails directed at me personally.
I know you suffer from verbal incontinence, but please direct it elsewhere.
Oh dear, what have i unleashed. Still, it's good to hear the voice of reason, Katie. But I do hope if you have kids they don't get to see this side of you.
Talking of kids, ad hominem attacks usually disguise paucity of intellect. But rant and rave all you will, you're the one who looks petty and ineffectual.
You wander through the Manson blogs like you own them, offering the same mishmash of platitudinous, rehashed and derivative hearsay and conjecture, and the same pathetic HA HAs, and as the evening wears on you become drunker and more vicious.
One day, when you're sober try reading what you posted the day before, and look at the people you've tried to steamroll. You might get a shock.
Need I say more?
http://nottheofficialtate-labiancablog.blogspot.com/
There, there, Proteus. Don't cry. I know you wish you were funny...but you're....well....NOT.
Well, I'm bored with you and my work is done here. Go ahead and read the autopsy reports over and over again if you think it will solve this case. There are only so many to read, but you can continue to read them until one day, it will dawn on you....these people are dead.
Have a nice life.
"Col, items posted to a public page on a social media site such as FB by the original owner of the photo, music file, graphic, or written statement, without written copyright notice or ownership notice, and with no notice about their re-posting or use, are in fact placed in the public domain."
Sorry, but that simply isn't true. Copyright notices have not been required since 1978--copyright is automatic as soon as the work is created and can only enter the public domain if the copyright owner expressly waives their copyright.
I have often wondered, if all the "regular TLB posters" showed up at Manson's funeral if a hockey brawl would break out. Or maybe just a 'Animal House' type foodfight.
I would break out some beers and a few dubies...
it would make for "people watching" in its highest form...
but a great party I bet...
Most of the people who make the most noise in places like this have the least to say when they have to look others in the eye....
:)
By the way- Happy Thanksgiving to all of you out there...
even the Turkeys lol
What Bing noted is correct.
Also, much of what is on Facebook will show up on search engines. Try this experiment:
Post a picture to FB
Caption it something nonsense, random characters, such as X%K8&
Google X%K8& in "images".
Voila.
Katie I have always enjoyed your posts and admire your knowledge on the TLB murders, but I now have even more respect for you after your comments on this thread.
Thank you for making my day!
Bing seems to be a great fan of Katie, and takes this to what are perhaps surprising limits. On my own blog this morning I found the charming message:
Bing has left a new comment on your post "Rationale":
Proteus you are a douche bag. i hope you die of a terminal illness. a slow painful death.
The message was later removed, but you do have to wonder what sort of human being can want to post a message like that, or just what the point is. Anyway, I thought you would like to know what sort of people there are on this blog.
By a strange coincidence I do have terminal cancer and am unlikely to live more than another six months or so. I have come to terms with that and can talk about it openly, although usually with my family. Not that it's something I would normally talk about when blogging. My early demise (I am in my 40s) may cheer Bing up more than it gladdens me.
This blog is clearly not a pleasant place to be. Col, we had this with Heaven a while back - maybe you would like to comment.
Proteus-
Katie addressed you, only after you insulted her first.
Leary complimented Katie, and you couldn‘t conduct yourself like a gentlemen, and just leave it.
You stepped-in, and questioned the depth of Katie’s knowledge.
Furthermore, you expressed that Katie couldn’t articulate.
These were unprovoked insults.
Whether your assessment is accurate or not, is insignificant.
You drew first blood.
Does this petty behavior make you feel better about yourself?
Look everyone-- Scroteus so smart.
Is that your game?
After Katie retorted (which she had a right to), your insults became exceptionally vicious and personal.
I've rarely seen such personal, vicious, and hurtful insults on a blog.
Now, you’re calling on the Colonel to bail you out?
You’re a worm.
It takes more than an expansive vocabulary, to be considered a gentlemen.
You can blog with a thesaurus and dictionary next to you, if that floats your boat.
But, you can’t disguise the fact that you are an annoying, impolite, petty, pompous ass.
It is you, who are a danger to children.
Hopefully, you haven't any.
You would do well to memorize a book on manners, class, humility and etiquette.
As you sir, possess none of these qualities.
“It’s better to be thought a fool, than to open your mouth, and remove all doubt”.
You sir, have proven yourself a fool.
Maybe you'll be a man and apologize to the lady, and everyone here, at the off-chance of salvaging an ounce of class, but I highly doubt it.
You'll continue to act a fool, in front of everyone, solidifying yourself as nothing more than an Ass with a dictionary.
Proteus...
I'm a busy man, with better ways to spend my time.
If you’d like to communicate further, I’m at LSB3.COM
Best Regards Colonel, and Happy Thanksgiving.
Suze,
Your information is correct. Proteus actually opened a new blog titled--- "NOT The Official Tate-Labianca Murders Blog".
The Header was comprised entirely of disparaging remarks towards the Colonel. There must have been 12 shots at the Colonel, all total.
The header finished by saying-- "This is the place to post comments, which will be deleted at Colonel's".
Now, he's deleted it all. He's changed the title and header, to something completely different---
and asking the Colonel to intervene on his behalf!
This guy is obviously a mentally disturbed freak. Proceed with caution folks. We've got a "live" one.
Dickhead, it's even worse than that. He posts using multiple aliases. He's used two of them on this very thread. Cancer, that's rich.
You guys spend one hell of a lot of time and energy on someone you value so little.
You know it reminds me of the playground when all the big, boisterous, bombastic bullies gang up on the newcomer. But of course it's empty vessels that make the most noise.
I am a little concerned, though, for your productivity (assuming you have jobs 'n all). Don't you have something more useful to do with your time than slag off an anonymous avatar? Sad, really.
My blog? Well look at my name ... todo pasa y todo queda, pero lo nuestro es pasar ...
Exactly, Suze that's what I've been trying to say. He won't comment here using his usual alias because The Col has ripped him a few new ones and made him cry.
He can't comment at Eviliz period. He has this little personality quirks that good people don't tolerate. Anti-semitism is one. If we even THINK it's him we delete his comments. Hence the multiple personalities here.
Problem is, he's too stupid to pull it off successfully.
Proteus said--
"You guys spend one hell of a lot of time and energy on someone you value so little".
It took me 120 seconds, to click your account, click your blog link, and read your header (riddled with insanity).
It's really quite effortless to identify a moron.
You've managed to insult every blogger, and every blogging location, in the course of one thread.
But yet-- I've never seen you offer one shread of enlightened commentary regarding the case, past or present
You have only used your words to degrade others.
Please-- Oh strange, mentally-ill freak (likely spending Thanksgiving alone in a basment apartment)-- enlighten us.
I'm waiting.
Please say something profound regarding the case, or do us all a favor and disappear, die of cancer, or whatever comes first.
I think eating shit, is a quicker death than cancer.
Please-- do us all the favor.
Have you ever heard the saying---
"The world can't be wrong, it must be me"?
That was written for you.
There's absolutely no way, this guy has a woman by his side for the holidays.
Hell just froze over. I agree with Katie and Dickhead - and they both cracked me up bad.
This guy (Proteus), is accusing everyone of spending too much time online.
Yet-- He's the one feuding with 12 people simultaneously? How does that logic work?
Some new type of math? lol
Hey Proteus--
I have one question.
You posted your demented example of a blog, and then quickly withdrew it, as soon as Matt posted a link.
Why?
I've GOT to hear this answer.
Happy Thanksgiving brownrice, hippichick, Leary, ColScott, Patty, AC, Katie, Louis, Bing, Lynyrd, Matt, St, Tramp, Marliese, Magpie, Dickhead and anyone else I may have left out!
Poirot, take Dickhead's advice and eat a pile of shit forthwith.
and a happy one to you Suze. I still say you are a dead ringer for Junie Oswald, Lee Harvey's daughter. just noting it cause it is 11/22.
and I am with you Matt, this is like the third time in a month I have to salute Mr. Dickhead for being dead on in his assessment and charges. If I were putting together a Manson debate team I would definately want both Katie and Dickhead on it not just for their intelligence but their ferocity. Good stuff.
Happy Thanksgiving Suze
Suze, Thank you for the Thanksgiving wishes...Happy Thanksgiving to you as well.
And everyone. :)
Happy thanksgiving, Suze.
The facts are the facts and I think most of us know what the facts are in the Tate/LaBianca murders.
Manson was behind it all and he had people do the killing for him.
The rest of it like Helter Skelter, drugs, sex and anything else was just a part of it all.
The real shame of it all is that Tate and most of the other victims could still be alive today.
George Vreeland Hill
GVH says:
The facts are the facts and I think most of us know what the facts are in the Tate/LaBianca murders.
With respect, I'm not altogether sure there is agreement on 'the facts'. There is to my mind considerable variance between what various perpetrators are reported to have said, seen and done.
I think this is where Col was coming from, with the suggestion that some people give too much credence to the contents of books written about the crime (in particular those of Bugliosi and Sanders).
This is why I originally posted in this thread, suggesting that 'facts' were more likely to be found in primary sources: court transcripts, police and autopsy reports, etc., with the caveat that these might also contain errors caused by perjury, poor transcription, etc.
This suggestion of mine was dissed by Katie:
You are a fucking idiot if you think that court transcripts, autopsy and coroner reports are going to answer any questions, other than how people died.
but I stand by it. I think that judicious study of primary data can lead to a good understanding of many aspects of this crime, and interpretation based on close reading can be rewarding.
This is the way historians proceed, and we should remember that these events happened long enough ago to be treated as history.
Belated happy thanksgiving to you all - I've been away.
Proteus-
You're posting at 3:45pm, on November 24th? lol
Please shoot yourself.
Dickhead
Perhaps you assume that bloggers only live in your time zone? Or in the US?
Be assured that when it's 03.45 somewhere it's always going to be some other time somewhere else. And that there is life as we know it beyond the USofA too.
And maybe try being nice for a change? I made a perfectly reasonable post and you have no call to reply in that way. It adds nothing to the thread, and only serves to justify the log in name you use.
Proteus-
You can't bullshit a bullshitter. You had nothing to do on Thanksgiving. Please stop this time zone foolishness.
You said-
"I made a perfectly reasonable post and you have no call to reply in that way. It adds nothing to the thread"
No Sir, you did not make a perfectly reasonable post. You are needlessly initiating trouble again.
Let me explain this, so even a heel like YOU can understand.
Katie has already left the room. You could have simply stated your opinion, without including her name at all.
Including Katie's previous comment in your post, adds ZERO to your point, or this thread.
Including her comment, serves NO OTHER PURPOSE than to antagonize, and perpetuate problems. You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.
Here's the truly sad part---
If Katie resurfaces to defend herself (again), you'll immediately cry foul. You'll play the victim, and point your crooked finger once again.
You initiate hostility, but afterwards you don't take ownership. You're simply a jerk.
I don't know what colour lenses you have in your glasses, Dickhead, but I think I'm the only one here to have had abuse and death threats dumped on me. For no other reason except I've offended Katie.
Katie is a bully with a bad and uncontrollable temper. You know that, I know that, everyone knows that. Lynyrd has threatened her countless times with expulsion from his (excellent) blog because she loses it. It's not like I'm telling you something you don't know. Read back up here and see who is taunting whom:
The people currently on this blog are almost all relative newcomers, migrants from Lynyrd's and Liz's blogs. Very few long-term bloggers are still around. The character has changed a great deal, and for the worse. What's with all this 'go and eat shit' and 'I hope you die' stuff. It's like kids who've just discovered they can say naughty words and no one can punish them.
I have twice tried to reply to the thread, which I seem to be the only one following. I quoted Katie in my last post because it was just about the only view relating to the thread. All I get in return is comments like 'go shoot yourself'.
It doesn't bother me, it saddens me. Assuming you're grown ups, there must be more worthwhile ways for you to expend your time and energies.
Proteus-
There are 84 comments on this thread, and for all your grandstanding, you've said essentially nothing.
You believe the reports are valuable, and worth reading. That's not exactly a profound thought. It's not earth-shattering insight. One might even say you are "master of the obvious".
The rest of your time, has been invested on foolishness.
As for Colonel's blog---
Colonel abandoned the place for some very long stretches. Consequently, his older members fell-off. It's not a big mystery.
Back to the topic---
BOTH the reports AND TLB-related books are valuable. It's true that most books are written for prophet, and thusly are suspect. But, if one dismisses all (TLB-related) books altogehter, they're compromising their research. Although interspersed with bullshit, there are facts and timelines which can be gleaned from books. Not all accounts are worthless.
I would agree that the reports are arguably more reliable (and first-hand) than TLB books. But at the end of the day (like it or not), Katie is correct.
The reports have been in existence for decades, yet the motive still eludes us. The reports indicate whom, how, and where-- but never why.
I also believe that Katie is correct regarding Manson. He is the only one who can truly answer the WHY question, and he never will. And unfortunately, (even if he did) his word is worthless with everyone at this point anyway. The man's mind is gone, and he's a chronic liar.
Proteus-- you're very smug. That's the most accurately I can describe you. Folks just don't like "smug" individuals.
For the record, I asked you to commit sucide. I never made death threats. There is a difference. I don't suppose if I asked again more politely, you would comply?
Leary7 said:
I have often wondered, if all the "regular TLB posters" showed up at Manson's funeral if a hockey brawl would break out. Or maybe just a 'Animal House' type foodfight.
--------------------------------------
If all the regular TLB posters turned up at Charlie's funeral, half of 'em would be sock puppets. They'd totally derail any attempt at a rational discussion and having done so, they'd invite everyone to a different funeral for Charlie that they'd just set up down the road.
I don't know about anyone else, but personally I get really bored by these recurrent shit-fights. They add nothing to any knowledge or understanding of the case.
Thank you for replying in a civilised way, I appreciate it.
One question with CM is, even if he suddenly started telling "the truth" how would we know to believe him.
But personally I don't believe he can really distinguish any more between his own posturing and pretence and what really went down.
As for 'the books', you know as well as I do how riddled with inaccuracies so many of them are ...
I'll pass on the invitation to top myself - I enjoy life too much. And just fyi, yes I did spend the evening of Thanksgiving alone (well with my immediate family), but as I'm not American and I don't live in the US it wasn't either a conscious decision or a lack of companionship - just an ordinary working day.
Oh, STFU Poirot. You live in rural SC and your name is Allan Crawford. You have challenged The Col to dinner and fights. You create more profiles than anyone can keep up with except me Katie and Dickhead.
An invitation to commit suicide cannot by any stretch of the imagination be considered a death threat. It's just wishful thinking on our part. It won't happen though, you just keep creating more profiles to start conversations with yourself (since no one else is willing). Then, as Dickhead points out you relish in playing the victim.
PLEASE eat a pile of shit and choke on it you worthless POS. PLEASE GO AWAY!
Well there's no pleasing some people, is there, dear Suze. Why don't you wash your mouth out with carbolic soap? There's really no need for language like that.
There's also no convincing you who I am and who I'm not. Col can though - by reading my IP (if he chooses to) and can quickly confirm that I am posting regularly from the UK rather than SC. (It would also explain my posting hours).
Tell you what, Suze, I find you quite unpleasant too, but am not going to disappear just because of a bad tempered bully like you. If you find my presence so obnoxious, why don't you go away?
I could be wrong but I don't actually think Proteus is Poirot. He completely lacks the neo-con, anti-semitic Helter Skelter-quoting obsession that Poirot is/was so noted for. Proteus seems much too rational to be Poirot. Christ, he's even got the Leary translation of Lao Tsu as the header on his blog... hardly sounds like Poirot.
Like he says though... the Col should be able to sus out his IP without too much trouble.
Thank you BR for a breath of common sense (although you missed the Heraclitus and the Longfellow). You must have just missed the Ineluctable Modality of the Visible too ...
Ironically, in another guise I have in fact done battle with both Poirot and Savage - I'm not hot on antisemitism myself and Savage, as we know, is barking mad.
But why should you believe me? In this dive I rediscover sensation - my eyes are open - WIDE ..
Proteus, in all your pontificating, you haven't once stated your take on this case.
Are you here to put people down and argue about being bullied, or discuss the case?
All I've noticed so far is a lot of whining.
As a true scholar of TLB as you claim to be, please tell us your opinion of motive, victims, perps, etc.
And please refer to the actual materials that you are reading to deduce said answers.
LOL. So now it's Poirot vs. Poirot???
Anyone can mask their IP address. My boyfriend put an app on my laptop that allows me to proxy through private servers throughout the world.
You are not in England. You don't have cancer. The offer to consume shit still stands.
Well, if it matters and if it makes you happy, believe what you will. Some people will believe anything. Why, the White Queen was telling me only the other day that sometimes she'd believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast. Oh, my paws and whiskers.
BTW, Poirot is posting these days in Lynyrd's blog - go ask him if he's me. Or if I'm him. We us. Or each other. I get confused with this identity thing, but you're the Queen of Socks. Me, I'm more of a Knave of Hearts type of person.
But you'll not get any Poirot-like behaviour from me. And I still don't understand the unnecessary bad language.
Oh, Suze, by the way: what your bf most likely did for you was to set up tunnelling through a socks proxy - that's what we call it - and so aptly named for you, do you not think?
It doesn't make anyone happy. I personally just want you to go away so we can get back to learning.
In your pathetic effort to wear us down and somehow have your worth validated you have posted on this thread using 3 different aliases. You aren't folling anyone. The only one you haven't used (yet) is MrPoirot.
I apologize for all of this. I won't shine light on this cockroach any longer.
I wonder which the three different aliases are? The only eighteen people posting on this thread have been:
A.C. Fisher Aldag
Bing
brownrice
ColScott
Dickhead
George Vreeland Hill
hippichick40
katie8753
leary7
louis365
LynyrdSkynyrdBand
Magpie
Marliese
Matt
Miss Spiritual Tramp 1979
Panamint Patty
St. Circumstance
Suze
So two more of these are me, are they? But can you tell me which, o wise Suze? It would be good to get this cleared up, would it not?
You forgot to list me. And no I am not you.
It's all Helter Skelter
Melee - I don't recall that I ever claimed to be a scholar of TLB, but I suppose in a sense I am.
You asked what I was currently reading. Well, limiting my reply to Manson-related material of the more academic nature, I have on my reading shelf at present four items:
Dardenne, R. (1970) The Case of Charles Manson (1970) "Plump, white rabbits" CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE STUDY OF MASS MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS VOL 51, ; 1997, 159-172
Fincke, G. (1965) Charles Manson Tries Out for the Monkees NORTH AMERICAN REVIEW VOL 289; PART 1, ; 2004, 29-29 -- UNIVERSITY OF NORTH IOWA – 2004
Fox, J. A.; Levin, J. (dng) Mass Murder An Analysis of Extreme Violence JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOANALYTIC STUDIES VOL 5; NUMBER 1, ; 2003, 47-64 -- Kluwer Academic Publishers -- 2003
Galliher, J. F. (dng) Donald A. Nielsen Horrible Workers: Max Stirner, Arthur Rimbaud, Robert Johnson, and the Charles Manson Circle. Studies in Moral Experience and Cultural Expression CONTEMPORARY SOCIOLOGY VOL 35; NUMB 4, ; 2006
Each of these four items has its own bibliography of material consulted by the relative academics - Sanders (who seems to be the Bible around here) is not much quoted.
In case you are interested in reading these items I obtained copies from my university library - I am sure you can get copies on inter-library loan if you wanted to. Being academic papers they are better researched and referenced than Sanders et al.
You also asked for my views. I am currently researching (hence my presence here) but my research is more related to the people who follow the Manson case. In that sense you guys are all helping me in your different ways, as I observe a great deal more than I post, on this and other blogs.
However, I do have some interest in the case itself. You also asked for my interpretation. Briefly, I tend to a simple explanation in which an angry and frustrated Manson somehow convinced some people to perform these acts as a ill defined revenge against a society that wouldn't accept him on his terms. Things spiralled out of control, and one confused action led to another for lack of a thought through plan. I think we have to separate out what convinced each of the killers and treat that apart from what motivated Manson. The details may be murky and perhaps never known, bout I don't see too much mystery here.
But opinions (like assholes) are two a penny.
Proteus, why do you revel in your ignorance?
Your comment “The details may be murky and perhaps never known, bout (sic) I don't see too much mystery here” verifies and confirms my initial suspicion that you aren't familiar with the facts of this case.
The "Manson-related materials" you are reading are simply dealing with the psychological aspects of mass murder and cult behavior. If you are researching the people who follow this case, I can only assume that you are planning to write yet another silly Manson book, or another pointless, non-factual Manson movie.
You might preface your project with this:
"Since I have no knowledge of the facts of this case, I have chosen to vilify people or persons who follow this case and have actual knowledge of the facts and events, thereby making myself look puerile and mentally deficient".
p.s., you forgot to list me too. And no, I'm not you.
Oh! Proteus is an inte-LECT-ual! Well now that changes everything, don't it? All hail the big brain! We're not worthy! LOL
My dear Melee
I sent you a list of what I was actually reading, as requested, not what I have read. Let us not confuse the two. It is patently absurd to judge the depth and breadth of my reading by my current consumption.
But why do I care? For some absurd reason you have decided to adopt the position that someone you don't know is ignorant and knows nothing about the case. Against such an irrational position I see little point in appealing to reason, so I shall simply wish you good day.
I'm not sure how you define an intellectual, PP, but yes, I do work in a university. Are you going to dismiss the entire academic community because they happen to have passed a few exams. You berate me for being an intellectual, while Melee thinks I'm puerile and mentally deficient. At least, Patty, I don't substitute insult for argument. Let me leave you with a suitable text for reflection:
Propagandists use this technique [of name calling] to create fear and arouse prejudice by using negative words (bad names) to create an unfavorable opinion or hatred against a group, beliefs, ideas or institutions they would have us denounce. This method calls for a conclusion without examining the evidence. Name Calling is used as a substitute for arguing the merits of an idea, belief, or proposal. It is often employed using sarcasm and ridicule in political cartoons and writing. When confronted with this technique the Institute for Propaganda Analysis suggests we ask ourselves the following questions: What does the name mean? Is there a real connection between the idea and the name being used? What are the merits of the idea if I leave the name out of consideration? When examining this technique try to separate your feelings about the name and the actual idea or proposal.
The quote is from an article you can read at http://mason.gmu.edu/~amcdonal/Propaganda%20Techniques.html if you feel so inclined.
With which I bid you both good day.
Proteus, you've done nothing BUT insult people on this thread. You've added nothing to its value.
So you work in a University. Big deal. You can't even comply with a simple request.
But at least you do know how to copy and paste.
Good day.
Proteus-
Let me get this straight.
According to your own testimony--
You will likely die within six months due to cancer.
Now you're telling us--
Studying the bozos on these blogs, is your bucket list?
My friend, you are crazier than I thought.
Mystery?? ffs... Tex did Helter Skelter to gain favor with Charlie...ie become no. 1 to Charlie
Interesting reading list, Proteus. As someone who thought they'd read just about everything there is on the case (iusually at time of publishing), I have to say I'm impressed.
So many of the books just rehash claims made in Sanders & Bugliosi that it's often quite difficult to find a fresh take on the case.
I assume the Charles Manson & the Monkees one is a rebuttal of that old hoary myth of Charlie auditioning for the Monkees (easily debunked just with a date comparison)... but the titles "Plump white rabbits" and "Studies in Moral Experience and Cultural Expression" I find intriguing.
I take it they're analyses of the social, cultural & psychological circumstances that allpwed ol' Charlie to have such apparent influence (a topic that resurfaces regularly on most of the serious Manson related blogs & forums).
I've only read a few of the academic tomes that deal with the family (Manson Women, Savage God and one or two others) but I've always been frustrated by the fact that (just like the more populist sources) they take all of Sanders' & Bugliosi's shpiels as unquestioned fact (which I believe was the whole point of the Col's original post).
Do you find this true of the pieces quoted, Proteus?
My apologies to everyone else if this seems too pretentious & high-falutin' for a Manson blog. I'm a high-school dropout myself but I still find an intelligent discussion far more rewarding than naked abuse... must be all the acid I dropped back in the day...
Brown Rice
Your name has great resonance for me as a long time macrobiotic. My thanks to you for treating me as a fellow human being. Hereunder some more info as requested.
Dardenne, R. (1970) The Case of Charles Manson
An analysis of the psychopathology behind Charles Manson's murderous career.
ABSTRACT: The paper discusses how Charles Manson's upbringing as the child of an unwed alcoholic mother raised in a broken home was the cause of his murderous life. The paper explains how a criminal gang often takes the place of an absent family structure, and in this case, it was Manson's own manufactured "family" that he himself could command after the fashion of a messianic leader. The paper shows how Manson's orgy of murder was a classic example of the violently anti-social personality in action and emphasizes that had Manson's environment been different, he might not have displayed these psychopathic tendencies he came to manifest as he matured.
Fincke, G. (1965) Charles Manson Tries Out for the Monkees
Not an academic article, more a humourous piece, semi literary (incl.poetry).
Fox, J. A.; Levin, J. (dng) Mass Murder An Analysis of Extreme Violence
ABSTRACT Mass murder involves the slaughter of four or more victims by one or a few assailants within a single event, lasting but a few minutes or as long as several hours. More than just arbitrary, using this minimum body count—as opposed to a two- or three-victim threshold suggested by others (e.g., Ressler et al., 1988, Holmes and Holmes, 2001)—helps to distinguish multiple killing from homicide generally. Moreover, by restricting our attention to acts committed by one or a few offenders, our working definition of multiple homicide also excludes highly organized or institutionalized killings (e.g., war crimes and large-scale acts of political terrorism as well as certain acts of highly organized crime rings). Although state-sponsored killings are important in their own right, they may be better explained through the theories and methods of political science than criminology. Thus, for example, the definition of multiple homicide would include the crimes committed by Charles Manson and his followers, but not those of Hitler's Third Reich, or the 9/11 terrorists, despite some similarities in the operations of authority.
[ctd in second post]
[ctd]
Galliher, J. F. (dng) Donald A. Nielsen Horrible Workers: Max Stirner, Arthur Rimbaud, Robert Johnson, and the Charles Manson Circle.
BOOK DESCRIPTION (BLURB) The poet makes himself a seer by a long, boundless, and systematic derangement of all the senses_. What if he is destroyed in his flight through things unheard of and unnamed: other horrible workers will come; they will begin at the horizons where the other has fallen. In Arthur Rimbaud's letter to Paul Demeny Rimbaud describes the poet's role as being something like a trickster. But the poet's trick, or joke, is self-directed. A long dissociation of the senses from reality creates, for the poet, a new relationship to reality. But the poet's work with reality is always something like a play at what is real. Play becomes necessary so that the poet doesn't just change his or her relationship to reality but, in playing, creates a space for poetics; a space for work. The French poet Arthur Rimbaud, American blues musician Robert Johnson, German anarchist intellectual Max Stirner, and the phenomena of the Manson family circle have all appeared as forms and figures on the invisible horizon described by Rimbaud above. Through a reading of Emil Durkheim's Suicide Donald Nielsen demonstrates how, in each case, one can locate hitherto unnoticed similarities in the social experiences of each subject featured in these four cases. Nielsen demonstrates how social experience can lead to forms of cultural expression that are contrary to the logic of the originating experience. In his discussion of experience and expression Nielsen creates a truly unique text that sheds new light on sociological theory, modernism and modernist thought, ethics and religious thought, and new and burgeoning methodologies in cultural studies. Sociologists, anthropologists, psychologists, philosophers of the social sciences, and adherents to cultural studies will find much of interest in Nielsen's excellent study.
I haven't yet processed any of these in any detail, as I am finishing some other work first.
It seems odd that you feel you have to apologise for being 'pretentious and high faulting'. After all, many people here claim to be 'researching' the Manson case. My surmise is that many of the people here have very little idea at all of what research entails. It certainly has very little to do with telling me to eat shit and die.
Have a good day.
It must be hard living with all this pent up and warrantless hatred, Katie. What does it add?
Brown Rice asked me a straightforward question, I gave a reasonably relevant reply and you sound off with threats, bad language and your sad HA HA HA.
Try counting to 10 before you reply?
Hi there,
I want to invite you to visit my blog with more than 800 documentaries for download,
especially on CHARLES MANSON, Nikolas Schreck, Joe Coleman, Kenneth Anger, John Waters, Laibach, Radio Werewolf, Boyd Rice, GG Allin, Lynette Squeaky Fromme, William S. Burroughs, L. Ron Hubbard & Scientology,
Nikola TESLA, Timothy McVeigh, Ruby Ridge, Aleister Crowley, The Unabomber, and many, many others.
There's also a lots of PDF books, and music of course (neofolk, Charlie Manson, Radio Werewolf. HCpunk, american folk, accoustics, Glen Danzig, Coil, NON, and so on...)
I hope that you find at least 20 topics you're interested in. :)
http://abraxas365dokumentarci.blogspot.com/
Thanks,
SON OF 365
childish.
Hah, I know I am a little Johnny come lately on this thread, but I at first was disgusted at the mocking of someone having cancer, then I followed Matts link to Proteus blog, not 1 member, then I realized the cancer is his blog, not the actual disease.
Beyond that, I don't mind the bickering and arguments, it breaks up the routine of theseblogs.
I really thought the release of the Tex tapes would give us something to discuss, but once again I was let down. The only thing to look forward to is the eventual death notice of maniac psycho killer Tex. Oh and by the way it was a drug burn at Cielo and a contract hit at LaBianca, now y'all have herd the real tmotive and you can stop arguing over it.
Post a Comment