Is The AGR Sacha, Sacha Hubbard?

[su-t...@webtv.net]

Has anyone confirmed that the "Sacha" who posts at AGR, is Sacha Hubbard
of HIll House Plants?

Sacha Hubbard's bio is on the net, & could be used by anyone wishing to
impersonate her.

According to the bio, (Sandra Jane) Sacha Valpy Hooper was the second
wife of the Viscount Villiers. He married three times, before dying
rather young (50?). His line/title started with a Villiers who was
mistress to King James I, & had an illegitimate child (children?) by
him.

There was mention of an island & Jersey, in connection with the
Viscount, his holdings & title.

Sacha is described as a woman from Jersey, whom the Viscount married &
divorced, & with whom he had one son & two daughters.

The son of Sacha & the Viscount Villiers, is now the current Viscount
Villiers (or some such), & supposedly has $$$ (hundreds of millions of
pounds in assets).

This info does not seem to correspond to the "Sacha" who posts here.

???

Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

[FJae]

su-te...@webtv.net wrote:
> Has anyone confirmed that the "Sacha" who posts at AGR, is Sacha Hubbard
> of HIll House Plants?
>
> Sacha Hubbard's bio is on the net, & could be used by anyone wishing to
> impersonate her.
>
> According to the bio, (Sandra Jane) Sacha Valpy Hooper was the second
> wife of the Viscount Villiers. He married three times, before dying
> rather young (50?). His line/title started with a Villiers who was
> mistress to King James I, & had an illegitimate child (children?) by
> him.
>

OH GOD that explains it!

> There was mention of an island & Jersey, in connection with the
> Viscount, his holdings & title.
>
> Sacha is described as a woman from Jersey, whom the Viscount married &
> divorced, & with whom he had one son & two daughters.
>
> The son of Sacha & the Viscount Villiers, is now the current Viscount
> Villiers (or some such), & supposedly has $$$ (hundreds of millions of
> pounds in assets).

Well why hasn't mommy received any of it? The pics of the house of
VERY MODEST! I wonder if the boy has a mistress!? Like his ancestors!

[FJae]

PS My aristocratic line has no bastard starting it! Might account for
my morals and the lack of if this is the same Sacha!

[su-t...@webtv.net]

quote:

Hon William Child Villiers

(Head of Family: Earl of Jersey)

Age 23; will inherit £200m

The Jersey inheritance, consisting of land in London near Heathrow and a
fortune in accumulated trusts, is safely offshore in the UK's domestic
tax haven, Jersey.

His grandfather married three times, at one stage to the former wife of
Cary Grant.

He is the son of his father's second marriage to a local Jersey woman,
Sacha Hooper, and has a half brother by his father's third marriage.

The entire Child Villiers family, who are descended from Barbara
Villiers, the celebrated mistress of James 1, King of England, live in
Jersey.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Young/Story/0,,206033,00.html

==============

Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

[Lux]

Quomodo cecidisti de caelo, O Lucifer,
qui mane oriebaris?

[FJae]

Funny, I guess Mommy dearest wasn't too kind, or wouldn't she see some
of that cash...It amazes me that Sacha in the pictures that we see
would have had access to that kind of money and would look that bad.
She could have had work done.

Amazing how people that go through husbands and or wives like they are
dirty tissue, throwing them to the side is generational. And I guess
that Sacha whoever she is has tried to take heart that she wasn't just
used but from the looks of it she was...just like Camilla

[Coco]

All those Lords, Viscounts, et all bullshit..., are all broke! There
is story of one of them on Discovery Channel, and he, like most of
them, is stone broke, as none of them ever worked for a living! They
are not allowed to collect off the public like the horse-face family! I
would highly doubt, someone who has never worked could accumulate that
kind of money, maybe 5 million ?! The house on Sacha's site is very
nice, I would not mind living there. I would border, but I do not think
I could tolerate the drinking and fighting, how would I sleep !! I
might get beat-up in my sleep, or hit in the head with a whiskey bottle!

[FJae]

PS I seem to remember her saying somewhere that father and son aren't
peers.

[su-t...@webtv.net]

quote:

George Henry Child-Villiers, Viscount Villiers (M)

b. 29 August 1948, d. circa 26 March 1998, #48366

Pedigree, Last Edited=6 Sep 2004
     
George Henry Child-Villiers, Viscount Villiers was the son of George
Francis Child-Villiers, 9th Earl of Jersey and Bianca Maria Luciana
Adriana Mottironi.

He was born on 29 August 1948.

He and an unknown person were divorced in 1973.

He married, secondly, Sasha Hooper Valpy in 1974. He and Sasha Hooper
Valpy were divorced in 1988.

He married, thirdly, Stephanie Penman in 1992. He died circa 26 March
1998.
     
He was styled as Viscount Villiers.
     
Child of George Henry Child-Villiers, Viscount Villiers and Sasha Hooper
Valpy:

William Child-Villiers, 10th Earl of Jersey   b. 1976

http://thepeerage.com/p5116.htm

===============

Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

[su-t...@webtv.net]

quote:

alt.talk.royalty

Aristocratic marriages, August, 2003
Michael Rhodes <mig73allenford2...@yahoo.co.uk>

The marriage took place 16 August, 2003, at the Parish Church of St
Martin de Grouville, Jersey, Channel Islands,

between George Francis William Villiers, 10th Earl of Jersey (b. 5
February, 1976), son of the late George Henry Villiers, styled Viscount
Villiers, & Mrs Sacha
Hubbard, of Landscove, Devon,

& Miss Marianne De Guelle, only daughter of Mr Peter De Guelle and Mrs
Jeannette De Guelle, of Jersey, Channel Islands.

--

Michael Rhodes

=======================

Is there a write-up of the actual wedding, of who attended it?

Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

[Sacha]

On 1/6/05 16:59, in article 17187-429...@storefull-3135.bay.webtv.net,
"su-t...@webtv.net" <su-t...@webtv.net> wrote:

This is very old news, Susan and has been posted here many times in order to
try to embarrass me. It didn't work any of those times, either. Now, of
course, you have laid yourself open to all the information that is out there
about YOU being posted here. You types never learn, do you.
And as my ex husband interested you so much, you have the date of his death
wrong.
I would like to point out to you that I have *never, ever* posted the names
of your family here or PK's family But now, you've moved the goalposts, so
I see no reason to refrain from doing so in future. And yes, I do have some
of that information - again, unsolicited and sent to me by people who are
horrified at your behaviour. I know your real name and I know the name of
some of PK's children, I know her date of birth, I know the age of her
husband and I know the nationality of her first husband. The rest will
follow.

BTW, PK will be *very* angry with you for posting this. She gets in the
most awful lather when my credentials for knowing rather more than she does,
are published to readers of this group.
--

Sacha
(remove the weeds for email)

[FJae]

I don't think so..PK was happy to hear of my aristocratic connection
which is by birth and not marriage...it is in my blood.

[su-t...@webtv.net]

=========================

As usual, you're bonkers, off on tangents, & making threats, Sacha.

My concern, as I stated at the beginning, is that you might not be
Sacha Villiers Hubbard.

The information about this individual is posted (very widely & often, &
by you too) on usenet & the internet, & you could be using it to
impersonate her.

I'm asking if anyone has checked to see if you are the Sacha Villiers
Hubbard of Hill House Plants.

I'm concerned that the police might confront the wrong individual,
because of you.

Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

[Sacha]

On 1/6/05 19:31, in article
1117650686....@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, "su-t...@webtv.net"
<su-t...@webtv.net> wrote:

Don't be so ridiculous. You've pulled a stunt that is going to blow right
up in your face, Pearl.

[Lux]

And what does ANY of this have to do with PK?

[GR]

"Lux" <luxpe...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1117641735.9...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

> Quomodo cecidisti de caelo, O Lucifer,
> qui mane oriebaris?

-----------

Typical! Not even your own words and no reference. No matter. It is Isaiah
14:12.

Sapis vere, o filia diaboli
GR
>

[su-t...@webtv.net]

I'm concerned that the AGR Sacha, is not Sacha Villiers Hubbard of Hill
House Plants.

Recently at Susan T's site, I read about the wealth of the Earl of
Villiers, & saw his mother's name. ?! Sacha.

Then, as the "wars" at AGR continued, the things that Sacha says about
herself, the Villier family, etc., just don't add up.

So yesterday, I decided to Google the Villiers family.

Sacha has posted a lot of information about this to newsgroups. And at
websites, they list info on the Villiers family, which I've quoted &
which info Sacha now claims is wrong. ???

I'm questioning whether the AGR Sacha, is Sacha Villiers Hubbard, or an
imposter.

In 1998, the AGR Sacha was posting here as Sacha Villiers, ..... yet the
real Sacha Villiers had been divorced since 1988, & probably remarried.
???

The Villiers family is a royalty, aristocracy-type topic, which is why I
didn't put OT in the title.

Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

PS I understand that Sacha will act ugly, deranged, & make threats, no
matter what topic is discussed here.

[FJae]

It doesn't add up. The death of the first wife, Sacha said he wasn;t
with his wife when she pursued him but that would have left little time
to get together. I think you are right there is something that doesnt'
fit.
There are not pictures at the Hll House of Sacha Hubbard but there are
some in the archives at a planting group

[Lux]

Only a moron would think a reference was appropriate or required. And
that is typical of you.

[Lux]

An educated person would not require a reference, nor would think that
I had composed these words, moron.

[su-t...@webtv.net]

Sacha wrote:

This is very old news, Susan and has been posted here many times in
order to try to embarrass me. It didn't work any of those times, either.

[Reply: I'm just now reading it. It's amazing that (if you are who you
say you are), ..... you're embarassed to have been married to the
Viscount Villiers, to have a son who is now Earl of Jersey, & to have
this info listed at websites. You don't make sense, Sacha.]

Now, of course, you have laid yourself open to all the information that
is out there about YOU being posted here. You types never learn, do you.

[Reply: Your usual BS & threats. Your justifications for acting ugly, &
blaming it on others. Last night on CBS, there was a program about an
imposter, a sociopath, & his justifications for crimes, meanness, lying,
cons. He'd impersonated a famous reporter.]

And as my ex husband interested you so much, you have the date of his
death wrong.

[Reply: Tell the website owner, not me.]

I would like to point out to you that I have *never, ever* posted the
names of your family here or PK's family But now, you've moved the
goalposts, so I see no reason to refrain from doing so in future.

[Reply: Your KKKlan (Hal Sanders & Q) have posted my personal
information, after repeatedly threatening to do so. It's a common bad
game you play. You've also repeatedly lied about me & what I posted, &
slandered me. I can't control what you do or don't do; only the police
can. I hope this latest threat by you, is forwarded by PK, to those
police officers who are investigating you. You've just threatened my
family too, in which there are children, minors.]

And yes, I do have some of that information - again, unsolicited and
sent to me by people who are horrified at your behaviour.

[Reply: More info sent by emails? You are stupid Sacha.]

I know your real name and I know the name of some of PK's children, I
know her date of birth, I know the age of her husband and I know the
nationality of her first husband. The rest will follow.

[Reply: You're threatening PK & her family again? And me?]

BTW, PK will be *very* angry with you for posting this. She gets in the
most awful lather when my credentials for knowing rather more than she
does, are published to readers of this group.

[Reply: And you're obviously crazy. You're stalking & threatening
people, & your posting their personal information on newsgroups, is
surely against the law.]

--
Sacha

=======================

Are you an imposter, Sacha?

Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

[Sacha]

On 1/6/05 20:54, in article 15991-42...@storefull-3138.bay.webtv.net,
"su-t...@webtv.net" <su-t...@webtv.net> wrote:

Really? Then no doubt your family will have something to say to you about
your behaviour to the families of others. How *very* typical of you to now
start hiding behind someone else's supposed children. What a filthy wretch
you are.

>
> And yes, I do have some of that information - again, unsolicited and
> sent to me by people who are horrified at your behaviour.
>
> [Reply: More info sent by emails? You are stupid Sacha.]

No. You, like your coven leader, are very, very much disliked and
distrusted.

>
> I know your real name and I know the name of some of PK's children, I
> know her date of birth, I know the age of her husband and I know the
> nationality of her first husband. The rest will follow.
>
> [Reply: You're threatening PK & her family again? And me?]

No, I'm not threatening you. I'm simply telling you that there is a wealth
of information on the Internet about both of you and that I see no reason to
with hold it from public view any longer. As I said, I'll sleep on it but
at the moment and on balance, I think it's more than time what you've tried
to do to my family was done to you. You better hope I don't feel like that
tomorrow but don't bet on it.

>
> BTW, PK will be *very* angry with you for posting this. She gets in the
> most awful lather when my credentials for knowing rather more than she
> does, are published to readers of this group.
>
> [Reply: And you're obviously crazy. You're stalking & threatening
> people, & your posting their personal information on newsgroups, is
> surely against the law.]

Oh no, not if it's available on the Internet. There will be nothing posted
that isn't available on the Internet, Su-T. And that amounts to rather a
lot. And you'll never know JUST when to expect it.

[su-t...@webtv.net]

============================================

Someone get the net. Sacha's gone around the bend.

I have nothing to hide, Sacha, so your threats mean nothing to me,
..... but other people might.

I do hope you get arrested, for the harm you keep trying to do to
others, ..... for your stalking, your getting & sending personal
information, your making threats with & posting it to newsgroups &
such.

For legal reasons: I have never & do not now, give you, your KKKlan
(hal sanders, jeansue libkind, Q, Susan Cohen, JFlexer, Andy 3rd,
Breton, Adrav, etc.), or anyone else, permission to post my personal
information. [However, Hal Sanders & Q have already posted some, & now
you have.]

And I hope that others can use this statement, when they sue you.

Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

PS BTW, my personal information is probably very easy to get, partly
because I'm using WebTV.

So don't flatter yourself, Sacha.

-------------

The question I asked (& which this thread is about), is are you an
imposter? Is your claim here at AGR, to be Sacha Villiers Hubbard,
valid? You're avoiding the question.

I've never claimed to be related/connected to the aristocracy, so my
background isn't relevant. You have.

[Sacha]

On 1/6/05 21:47, in article
1117658866.5...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com, "su-t...@webtv.net"
<su-t...@webtv.net> wrote:

Your background is very relevant to the way you treat people on here, Su-T.
And despite what ignorant people like you think, the aristocracy isn't
royalty, so unless the behaviour of members of the aristocracy have a direct
bearing on royal matters, your 'interest' and mischief making with regard to
members of the aristocracy is going to get you into a load of trouble, I'm
happy to say.

[FJae]

Sacha wrote:
> On 1/6/05 20:54, in article 15991-42...@storefull-3138.bay.webtv.net,
> "su-t...@webtv.net" <su-t...@webtv.net> wrote:
>
> > Sacha wrote:
> >
> > This is very old news, Susan and has been posted here many times in
> > order to try to embarrass me. It didn't work any of those times, either.
> >
> > [Reply: I'm just now reading it. It's amazing that (if you are who you
> > say you are), ..... you're embarassed to have been married to the
> > Viscount Villiers, to have a son who is now Earl of Jersey, & to have
> > this info listed at websites. You don't make sense, Sacha.]
> >
> > Now, of course, you have laid yourself open to all the information that
> > is out there about YOU being posted here. You types never learn, do you.

who says "you types" are you racist too?

> >
> > [Reply: Your usual BS & threats. Your justifications for acting ugly, &
> > blaming it on others. Last night on CBS, there was a program about an
> > imposter, a sociopath, & his justifications for crimes, meanness, lying,
> > cons. He'd impersonated a famous reporter.]
> >
> > And as my ex husband interested you so much, you have the date of his
> > death wrong.
> >
> > [Reply: Tell the website owner, not me.]
> >
> > I would like to point out to you that I have *never, ever* posted the
> > names of your family here or PK's family But now, you've moved the
> > goalposts, so I see no reason to refrain from doing so in future.
> >
> > [Reply: Your KKKlan (Hal Sanders & Q) have posted my personal
> > information, after repeatedly threatening to do so. It's a common bad
> > game you play. You've also repeatedly lied about me & what I posted, &
> > slandered me. I can't control what you do or don't do; only the police
> > can. I hope this latest threat by you, is forwarded by PK, to those
> > police officers who are investigating you. You've just threatened my
> > family too, in which there are children, minors.]
>
> Really? Then no doubt your family will have something to say to you about
> your behaviour to the families of others. How *very* typical of you to now
> start hiding behind someone else's supposed children. What a filthy wretch
> you are.

Let others make up opinions about people Sacha, why are you ALWAYS in
the middle. You use really nasty language, what happened to you in
your childhood to warrant such a sick mind.

> >
> > And yes, I do have some of that information - again, unsolicited and
> > sent to me by people who are horrified at your behaviour.
> >
> > [Reply: More info sent by emails? You are stupid Sacha.]
>
> No. You, like your coven leader, are very, very much disliked and
> distrusted.
> >
> > I know your real name and I know the name of some of PK's children, I
> > know her date of birth, I know the age of her husband and I know the
> > nationality of her first husband. The rest will follow.
> >
> > [Reply: You're threatening PK & her family again? And me?]
>
> No, I'm not threatening you. I'm simply telling you that there is a wealth
> of information on the Internet about both of you and that I see no reason to
> with hold it from public view any longer. As I said, I'll sleep on it but
> at the moment and on balance, I think it's more than time what you've tried
> to do to my family was done to you.

Her question is are you Sacha the reall Sacha Hubbard, we have seen no
proof.

[GR]

"Lux" <luxpe...@aol.com> wrote in message

news:1117654797.6...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> An educated person would not require a reference, nor would think that
> I had composed these words, moron.

-------------
Absolutely right, fatua mea.
I did not need a reference nor would I ever have thought you intellectually
capable of emulating Saint Jerome's translation of the original Hebrew text.
But if you are going to cite the words of others, ancient or contemporary,
it is after all the custom to place them within quotation marks. It
displays yet again your ignorance.
GR
------------

[su-t...@webtv.net]

Sacha wrote:

Your background is very relevant to the way you treat people on here,
Su-T.

[Reply: You know that's nonsense, Sacha. You're the one who treats
people badly here, & you've been repeatedly confronted about it. Check
the archives.]

And despite what ignorant people like you think, the aristocracy isn't
royalty, so unless the behaviour of members of the aristocracy have a
direct bearing on royal matters, your 'interest' and mischief making
with regard to members of the aristocracy is going to get you into a
load of trouble, I'm happy to say.

[Reply: In the info I quoted in my posts, it states that Villiers was
the mistress of James I, by whom she had a child. That relates the
Villiers aristocracy to royalty (a King of England).

And another threat?]

--
Sacha

=============================

I've posted about the Villiers family, not your family.

[Sacha]

On 1/6/05 22:20, in article 15431-42...@storefull-3137.bay.webtv.net,

"su-t...@webtv.net" <su-t...@webtv.net> wrote:
>
> I've posted about the Villiers family, not your family.
>
> Are you an imposter, Sacha?
>
> Susan, Su_Texas my opinions
>

Find out for yourself, Susan.

[Lux]

Known simply as the Vulgate, flatus. There is no need to use quotation
marks around a biblical reference, nor was adding the weight of a
citation to Isaiah part of the joke. I understand you have no sense of
humor, in addition to your other unattractive qualities.

[Charlene]

<su-t...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:15990-42...@storefull-3138.bay.webtv.net...

You must be seriously insane.

Charlene

[FJae]

serious yes insane no

[Coco]

FJae wrote:

> Charlene wrote:
> > You must be seriously insane.
> >
> > Charlene
>
> serious yes insane no

Not at all insane, in fact, one of the more interesting posters! She is
kind enough to share her views, and receives malicious harassment for
it! It is kind of sick the way they gang up on posters, this is why so
many good, and kind, posters have left. A person can only handle so
much of the cruel harassment from people who are obviously unbalanced!
I'm talking about this Charlene chick, she can go feck off!

[FJae]

The real question should be WHERE is S's, the AGR S's ,husband?
She is on here day and night...He must get lonely being told to go and
keep himself busy until old S is off. His pictures make him seem nice
although in the archives S reported he made comments about women's
breasts on a beach...not refined I suppose. Or S is making up stuff
again

[Coco]

FJae wrote:
> The real question should be WHERE is S's, the AGR S's ,husband?
> She is on here day and night...He must get lonely being told to go and
> keep himself busy until old S is off. His pictures make him seem nice
> although in the archives S reported he made comments about women's
> breasts on a beach...not refined I suppose. Or S is making up stuff
> again
>

Maybe he hangs out at the nude beaches while Sacha's on the internet?
Or maybe Sacha is flashing her hooters to strangers! I'm sure he is a
nice man, at his wits end with his wife! I would have unplugged her PC
long ago! It would be good for her.

[FJae]

Coco wrote:
> FJae wrote:
> > The real question should be WHERE is S's, the AGR S's ,husband?
> > She is on here day and night...He must get lonely being told to go and
> > keep himself busy until old S is off. His pictures make him seem nice
> > although in the archives S reported he made comments about women's
> > breasts on a beach...not refined I suppose. Or S is making up stuff
> > again
> >
>
> Maybe he hangs out at the nude beaches while Sacha's on the internet?

Ok I just Laughed very hard outloud! A vision of him trying to busy
himself while she goes in for another fight on the old computs is just
weird!

> Or maybe Sacha is flashing her hooters to strangers! I'm sure he is a
> nice man, at his wits end with his wife! I would have unplugged her PC
> long ago!

I know but one can only imagine is she is doing this and quite possibly
impersonating someone He has tried and can't do anything. What a good
soul not to divorce her. All the good ones get the cows don't they!

[Q]

"Charlene" <ra...@enter.net> wrote in message
news:u7sne.10468$5I5.8...@newshog.newsread.com...

Uh huh.

If you Web Google "su-t...@webtv.net" and "Rusk" or "Mother F" or "justice
without mercy," you will get a tiny idea of how troubled her family-- as
well as the authorities where she resides -- believe her to be. -- Q

>
> Charlene
>
>

[Q]

<su-t...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:15991-42...@storefull-3138.bay.webtv.net...

Maybe we should repost what you've posted about your family and especially,
what you say you'd like to see happen to them.
-- Q

(snip)

[Q]

"FJae" <f_jo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1117657576.2...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

>
>
> Sacha wrote:
> > On 1/6/05 20:54, in article
15991-42...@storefull-3138.bay.webtv.net,
> > "su-t...@webtv.net" <su-t...@webtv.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Sacha wrote:
> > >
> > > This is very old news, Susan and has been posted here many times in
> > > order to try to embarrass me. It didn't work any of those times,
either.
> > >
> > > [Reply: I'm just now reading it. It's amazing that (if you are who you
> > > say you are), ..... you're embarassed to have been married to the
> > > Viscount Villiers, to have a son who is now Earl of Jersey, & to have
> > > this info listed at websites. You don't make sense, Sacha.]
> > >
> > > Now, of course, you have laid yourself open to all the information
that
> > > is out there about YOU being posted here. You types never learn, do
you.
>
>
> who says "you types" are you racist too?

Why? Are you claiming to be black now? -- Q
(snip)

[Q]

<su-t...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:1117658866.5...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

We don't need your permission. It's "public domain" -- isn't that what you
wrote about other people's stuff that's already on the internet? And
"public domain" -- as far as I'm concerned -- also includes the White Pages.

>
> And I hope that others can use this statement, when they sue you.
>
> Susan, Su_Texas my opinions
>
> PS BTW, my personal information is probably very easy to get, partly
> because I'm using WebTV.

Thanks for the tip, but we have it already. -- Q

[FJae]

"you types' is a typical racist comment

[Danny]

On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 19:11:13 +0100, Sacha
<sa...@weedsgarden506.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

>On 1/6/05 16:59, in article 17187-429...@storefull-3135.bay.webtv.net,
>"su-t...@webtv.net" <su-t...@webtv.net> wrote:
>
>> quote:
>>
>> George Henry Child-Villiers, Viscount Villiers (M)
>>
>> b. 29 August 1948, d. circa 26 March 1998, #48366
>>
>> Pedigree, Last Edited=6 Sep 2004
>>      
>> George Henry Child-Villiers, Viscount Villiers was the son of George
>> Francis Child-Villiers, 9th Earl of Jersey and Bianca Maria Luciana
>> Adriana Mottironi.
>>
>> He was born on 29 August 1948.
>>
>> He and an unknown person were divorced in 1973.
>>
>> He married, secondly, Sasha Hooper Valpy in 1974. He and Sasha Hooper
>> Valpy were divorced in 1988.
>>
>> He married, thirdly, Stephanie Penman in 1992. He died circa 26 March
>> 1998.
>>      
>> He was styled as Viscount Villiers.
>>      
>> Child of George Henry Child-Villiers, Viscount Villiers and Sasha Hooper
>> Valpy:
>>
>> William Child-Villiers, 10th Earl of Jersey   b. 1976
>>
>> http://thepeerage.com/p5116.htm
>>
>> ===============
>>
>> Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

>>
>
>This is very old news, Susan and has been posted here many times in order to

>try to embarrass me. It didn't work any of those times, either. Now, of

>course, you have laid yourself open to all the information that is out there
>about YOU being posted here. You types never learn, do you.

>And as my ex husband interested you so much, you have the date of his death
>wrong.

>I would like to point out to you that I have *never, ever* posted the names
>of your family here or PK's family But now, you've moved the goalposts, so

>I see no reason to refrain from doing so in future. And yes, I do have some

>of that information - again, unsolicited and sent to me by people who are

>horrified at your behaviour. I know your real name and I know the name of

>some of PK's children, I know her date of birth, I know the age of her
>husband and I know the nationality of her first husband. The rest will
>follow.
>

>BTW, PK will be *very* angry with you for posting this. She gets in the
>most awful lather when my credentials for knowing rather more than she does,
>are published to readers of this group.

you pathetic old cow, TRYING tp blame someone else for information YOU
posted, yuor EVIL.

[Danny]

On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 19:21:07 +0100, Sacha
<sa...@weedsgarden506.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

>On 1/6/05 19:21, in article
>1117650111.2...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, "FJae"
><f_jo...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>> I don't think so..PK was happy to hear of my aristocratic connection
>> which is by birth and not marriage...it is in my blood.
>>> --
>
>Don't be ridiculous. You're as much of an aristocrat as PK is.

HA, busted yourself again, FJae does not lie. *I* KNOW she does not
lie.

[Danny]

On 1 Jun 2005 11:31:26 -0700, "su-t...@webtv.net"
<su-t...@webtv.net> wrote:

>> --
>>
>> Sacha
>> (remove the weeds for email)
>
>
>
>=========================
>

>As usual, you're bonkers, off on tangents, & making threats, Sacha.
>
>My concern, as I stated at the beginning, is that you might not be
>Sacha Villiers Hubbard.
>
>The information about this individual is posted (very widely & often, &
>by you too) on usenet & the internet, & you could be using it to
>impersonate her.
>
>I'm asking if anyone has checked to see if you are the Sacha Villiers

>Hubbard of Hill House Plants.
>

>I'm concerned that the police might confront the wrong individual,
>because of you.
>
>Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

good point Susan, and all the information you posted are quoted from
information readily available on the internet, unlike the crap SADCOW
is threatening to post.

[Danny]

On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 19:33:21 +0100, Sacha
<sa...@weedsgarden506.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

>On 1/6/05 19:31, in article
>1117650686....@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, "su-t...@webtv.net"

>Don't be so ridiculous. You've pulled a stunt that is going to blow right
>up in your face, Pearl.

yet another CLEAR THREAT.

[Danny]

you are EVIL standing in for yuor bitch sadcow - i have no need or
desire to look up anything regarding Susan, she has always been polite
with me - that is all I look for in a person, polite kind and decent -
look the words up, you just MIGHT learn something new today.

>
>
>
>>
>> Charlene
>>
>>
>

[FJae]

she is going on about bomb's and I think the police would be happy to
hear about that

[Danny]

On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 21:12:05 +0100, Sacha
<sa...@weedsgarden506.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

>On 1/6/05 20:54, in article 15991-42...@storefull-3138.bay.webtv.net,

>"su-t...@webtv.net" <su-t...@webtv.net> wrote:
>
>> Sacha wrote:
>>
>> This is very old news, Susan and has been posted here many times in
>> order to try to embarrass me. It didn't work any of those times, either.
>>

>> [Reply: I'm just now reading it. It's amazing that (if you are who you
>> say you are), ..... you're embarassed to have been married to the
>> Viscount Villiers, to have a son who is now Earl of Jersey, & to have
>> this info listed at websites. You don't make sense, Sacha.]
>>

>> Now, of course, you have laid yourself open to all the information that
>> is out there about YOU being posted here. You types never learn, do you.
>>

>> [Reply: Your usual BS & threats. Your justifications for acting ugly, &
>> blaming it on others. Last night on CBS, there was a program about an
>> imposter, a sociopath, & his justifications for crimes, meanness, lying,
>> cons. He'd impersonated a famous reporter.]
>>

>> And as my ex husband interested you so much, you have the date of his
>> death wrong.
>>

>> [Reply: Tell the website owner, not me.]
>>

>> I would like to point out to you that I have *never, ever* posted the
>> names of your family here or PK's family But now, you've moved the
>> goalposts, so I see no reason to refrain from doing so in future.
>>

>> [Reply: Your KKKlan (Hal Sanders & Q) have posted my personal
>> information, after repeatedly threatening to do so. It's a common bad
>> game you play. You've also repeatedly lied about me & what I posted, &
>> slandered me. I can't control what you do or don't do; only the police
>> can. I hope this latest threat by you, is forwarded by PK, to those
>> police officers who are investigating you. You've just threatened my
>> family too, in which there are children, minors.]
>
>Really? Then no doubt your family will have something to say to you about
>your behaviour to the families of others. How *very* typical of you to now
>start hiding behind someone else's supposed children. What a filthy wretch
>you are.
>>

>> And yes, I do have some of that information - again, unsolicited and
>> sent to me by people who are horrified at your behaviour.
>>

>> [Reply: More info sent by emails? You are stupid Sacha.]
>
>No. You, like your coven leader, are very, very much disliked and
>distrusted.
>>

>> I know your real name and I know the name of some of PK's children, I
>> know her date of birth, I know the age of her husband and I know the
>> nationality of her first husband. The rest will follow.
>>

>> [Reply: You're threatening PK & her family again? And me?]
>
>No, I'm not threatening you. I'm simply telling you that there is a wealth

>of information on the Internet about both of you and that I see no reason to

>with hold it from public view any longer. As I said, I'll sleep on it but
>at the moment and on balance, I think it's more than time what you've tried
>to do to my family was done to you. You better hope I don't feel like that
>tomorrow but don't bet on it.

lets hope it is a long sleep, a VERY LONG ONE, sick of her rants and
accusations and threats.

>>
>> BTW, PK will be *very* angry with you for posting this. She gets in the
>> most awful lather when my credentials for knowing rather more than she
>> does, are published to readers of this group.
>>

[Danny]

On 1 Jun 2005 09:10:23 -0700, "Coco" <cocothe...@aol.com> wrote:

>All those Lords, Viscounts, et all bullshit..., are all broke! There
>is story of one of them on Discovery Channel, and he, like most of
>them, is stone broke, as none of them ever worked for a living! They
>are not allowed to collect off the public like the horse-face family! I
>would highly doubt, someone who has never worked could accumulate that
>kind of money, maybe 5 million ?! The house on Sacha's site is very
>nice, I would not mind living there. I would border, but I do not think
>I could tolerate the drinking and fighting, how would I sleep !! I
>might get beat-up in my sleep, or hit in the head with a whiskey bottle!

or slapped on the face with a worn out keyboard.

[Q]

"FJae" <f_jo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:1117677720.4...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

Since when? *Types* refers to people who are foolish enough to think that
what they do to others won't come around and bite them in the ass. There
are lots of people like that. I think it's racist for you to assume it's
about race. -- Q

[canetoad]

> If you Web Google "su-t...@webtv.net" and "Rusk" or "Mother F" or "justice
> without mercy," you will get a tiny idea of how troubled her family-- as
> well as the authorities where she resides -- believe her to be. -- Q

I had no idea there were that many medical forums on the web. There ya
go, eh?

[jack]

"Danny" <m...@home.net> wrote in message
news:voqs91do5lccsp4ii...@4ax.com...

She"s to stupid to realize that any libel; writ she does serve will become
virtually null and void because of her own behaviour.

[Sacha]

On 2/6/05 6:08, in article 429e9470$0$27848$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au,
"canetoad" <canedel...@fastmail.invalid.fm> wrote:

There's a lot of information out there, isn't there?

[Susan Cohen]

"GR" <G...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:d7l97f$pn4$1...@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...

>
> "Lux" <luxpe...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1117654797.6...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> An educated person would not require a reference, nor would think that
>> I had composed these words, moron.
> -------------
> Absolutely right, fatua mea.
> I did not need a reference nor would I ever have thought you
> intellectually
> capable of emulating Saint Jerome's translation of the original Hebrew
> text.

& not everyone reads the NT.

SusanC

[jack]

"Sacha" <sa...@weedsgarden506.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:BEC3D525.17293%sa...@weedsgarden506.fsnet.co.uk...

> On 1/6/05 20:54, in article
15991-42...@storefull-3138.bay.webtv.net,

> "su-t...@webtv.net" <su-t...@webtv.net> wrote:
>
> > Sacha wrote:
> >
> > This is very old news, Susan and has been posted here many times in
> > order to try to embarrass me. It didn't work any of those times, either.
> >

> > [Reply: I'm just now reading it. It's amazing that (if you are who you
> > say you are), ..... you're embarassed to have been married to the
> > Viscount Villiers, to have a son who is now Earl of Jersey, & to have
> > this info listed at websites. You don't make sense, Sacha.]
> >

> > Now, of course, you have laid yourself open to all the information that
> > is out there about YOU being posted here. You types never learn, do you.
> >

> > [Reply: Your usual BS & threats. Your justifications for acting ugly, &
> > blaming it on others. Last night on CBS, there was a program about an
> > imposter, a sociopath, & his justifications for crimes, meanness, lying,
> > cons. He'd impersonated a famous reporter.]
> >

> > And as my ex husband interested you so much, you have the date of his
> > death wrong.
> >

> > [Reply: Tell the website owner, not me.]
> >

> > I would like to point out to you that I have *never, ever* posted the
> > names of your family here or PK's family But now, you've moved the
> > goalposts, so I see no reason to refrain from doing so in future.
> >

> > [Reply: Your KKKlan (Hal Sanders & Q) have posted my personal
> > information, after repeatedly threatening to do so. It's a common bad
> > game you play. You've also repeatedly lied about me & what I posted, &
> > slandered me. I can't control what you do or don't do; only the police
> > can. I hope this latest threat by you, is forwarded by PK, to those
> > police officers who are investigating you. You've just threatened my
> > family too, in which there are children, minors.]
>
> Really? Then no doubt your family will have something to say to you about
> your behaviour to the families of others. How *very* typical of you to
now
> start hiding behind someone else's supposed children. What a filthy
wretch
> you are.
> >

> > And yes, I do have some of that information - again, unsolicited and
> > sent to me by people who are horrified at your behaviour.
> >

> > [Reply: More info sent by emails? You are stupid Sacha.]
>
> No. You, like your coven leader, are very, very much disliked and
> distrusted.

You keep saying this to all and sundry yet from where i am the only hated
person in here is you! These people play you like a finely tuned violin,
they know how to push your buttons! You blow up so easily!

> >
> > I know your real name and I know the name of some of PK's children, I
> > know her date of birth, I know the age of her husband and I know the
> > nationality of her first husband. The rest will follow.
> >

> > [Reply: You're threatening PK & her family again? And me?]
>
> No, I'm not threatening you. I'm simply telling you that there is a
wealth

> of information on the Internet about both of you and that I see no reason
to

> with hold it from public view any longer. As I said, I'll sleep on it but
> at the moment and on balance, I think it's more than time what you've
tried
> to do to my family was done to you. You better hope I don't feel like
that
> tomorrow but don't bet on it.
> >

> > BTW, PK will be *very* angry with you for posting this. She gets in the
> > most awful lather when my credentials for knowing rather more than she
> > does, are published to readers of this group.
> >

> > [Reply: And you're obviously crazy. You're stalking & threatening
> > people, & your posting their personal information on newsgroups, is
> > surely against the law.]
>
>
> Oh no, not if it's available on the Internet. There will be nothing posted
> that isn't available on the Internet, Su-T. And that amounts to rather a
> lot. And you'll never know JUST when to expect it.

[canetoad]

My Word! The range of forums is a bit of a surprise to me though.I'd
figured it would be more the self-help/depression/personality test type.
Maybe I haven't looked far enough.

[Sacha]

On 1/6/05 19:36, in article
1117651014.0...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com, "Lux"
<luxpe...@aol.com> wrote:

> And what does ANY of this have to do with PK?
>
Rather a lot. Su-T trots along behind all PK's nastiness like some little
toy dog. This behaviour now is akin to her bizarre actions when I had to
serve a Cease & Desist letter on PK. Su-T, who was in no way involved in
the matter, actually emailed my lawyer, using her pseudonym, to ask him if I
was in fact, his client. She actually expected him to hand out information
on me to an uninvolved third party, who was emailing him anonymously! She
was in no way implicated in the matter that led to the sending of that
letter, and she is in no way involved - by me - in anything happening on agr
now. It is a long time since I have responded to Su-T, so her posting of my
family's information on here is harassment and stalking and is calculated to
cause me distress and I am treating it accordingly.
It is ridiculous of her to claim she is doing it so that the police don't
approach the wrong person, because, even if the police were involved in
someone sending me PK's totally innocuous photograph it is absolutely
nothing to do with Su-T and I have not discussed the matter with her.

Despite the fact that I have never posted the names of any of their families
on here, Su-T (and often, by association, PK) appears to think it's just
fine to do that to mine and in this instance, Su-T is going to be the one
carrying the can for that. I have taken the necessary action over it and
what that is I'm keeping to myself.

Both PK and Su-T need to remember that while I wouldn't *dream* of posting
details of their actual addresses, family members' names, photos etc. on
here, others might not be so considerate. Both of them have made enough
enemies to last most people a lifetime and Su-T, in particular, has a
posting trail, including details of her incarceration in a mental hospital,
her feuds with legal and medical personnel and her own family, going back a
very long way. She has written some very disturbing stuff about what she
would like to happen to children that broke into a house where she was
storing her things and IMO, it shows a potential for violence that is
terrifying. I'm not having this sort of person pursuing me.

And for what it's worth, IMO, all this from Su-T is an attempt to avenge PK
for someone sending me an unsolicited photograph of PK by email. Despite
the accusations and obfuscations being flung around here, I have NOT sent
that photo on by email, nor has it been transmitted by any other method and
I have decided that I shall never do so. PK is lucky that she selects well
those she chooses to fight with. Some of her other and earlier enemies
would have plastered it on billboards 10 feet high by now.

[Brian Pears]

FJae <f_jo...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>The real question should be WHERE is S's, the AGR S's ,husband? She is
>on here day and night...He must get lonely being told to go and keep
>himself busy until old S is off. His pictures make him seem nice
>although in the archives S reported he made comments about women's
>breasts on a beach...not refined I suppose. Or S is making up stuff again

You do seem to get off on imagining salacious behaviour on the
part of others. What a sick, weird bitch you are!

--
Brian Pears
Gateshead, UK

[GR]

"Lux" <luxpe...@aol.com> wrote in message

news:1117664791.6...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Known simply as the Vulgate

Not quite. It is the *entire*, 4th Century biblical compilation undertaken
by Eusebius Hieronymus which is known as 'the Vulgate' ('Vulgata editio')
(and that, only from from c. the Fourteenth Century onwards).
I was being more precise, referring only to the verse translated by Saint
Jerome as quoted by you.
GR - Flatus eruditionis, spero, in recessus obscuros animi tui.
------------

, flatus. There is no need to use quotation
> marks around a biblical reference, nor was adding the weight of a
> citation to Isaiah part of the joke. I understand you have no sense of
> humor, in addition to your other unattractive qualities.

>
> GR wrote:
> > "Lux" <luxpe...@aol.com> wrote in message

> > news:1117654797.6...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > > An educated person would not require a reference, nor would think that
> > > I had composed these words, moron.
> > -------------
> > Absolutely right, fatua mea.
> > I did not need a reference nor would I ever have thought you
intellectually
> > capable of emulating Saint Jerome's translation of the original Hebrew
text.

[FJae]

> about race. -- Q you would i wouldn't put it past you to be a racist too

[Jean Sue Libkind]

su-t...@webtv.net wrote:

> For legal reasons: I have never & do not now, give you, your KKKlan
> (hal sanders, jeansue libkind, Q, Susan Cohen, JFlexer, Andy 3rd,
> Breton, Adrav, etc.), or anyone else, permission to post my personal
> information. [However, Hal Sanders & Q have already posted some, & now
> you have.]
>

> And I hope that others can use this statement, when they sue you.
>
> Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

First of all, Susie-Que, I am not not and never have been a member of
the Klu Klux Klan; I consider such allegations libelous and that the
burden of proof is on you.

Secondly, I consider the said Klu Klux Klan a terrorist organization, as
does the US government and, given the political climate post 9/11, such
charges are particularly onerous.

Thirdly, as expressed in previous posts on your beloved Confederacy, you
should know I'm not in the KKK since you don't see me at meetings.

Finally, I have never posted any of your personal information on AGR or
anywhere else; I have made reference to items in your biography which
you yourself have supplied.

1. You said you were on chemotherapy for cancer; so, how's it going?
2. You have been abused by your family; so, how would they like to know
you say that?
3. You live in Texas; enough said.
4. You worship the confederacy, a lost cause. The only people I know who
still do so (and I have lived in the south, honey chile) are rednecks.
I'd wear a scarf in the sun, luv.

Don't start with me, Su-T. We don't even let wimps like you park outside
the stadium where I play hardball.

js

[Jean Sue Libkind]

GR wrote:
> "Lux" <luxpe...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1117654797.6...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>>An educated person would not require a reference, nor would think that
>>I had composed these words, moron.
>
> -------------
> Absolutely right, fatua mea.
> I did not need a reference nor would I ever have thought you intellectually
> capable of emulating Saint Jerome's translation of the original Hebrew text.
> But if you are going to cite the words of others, ancient or contemporary,
> it is after all the custom to place them within quotation marks. It
> displays yet again your ignorance.
> GR

She's the one who didn't pay attention at school and it shows. Google
must be a godsend for her; she can pretend to be erudite.

js

[Jean Sue Libkind]

su-t...@webtv.net wrote:

>
>
> =========================
>
> As usual, you're bonkers, off on tangents, & making threats, Sacha.
>
> My concern, as I stated at the beginning, is that you might not be
> Sacha Villiers Hubbard.
>
> The information about this individual is posted (very widely & often, &
> by you too) on usenet & the internet, & you could be using it to
> impersonate her.
>
> I'm asking if anyone has checked to see if you are the Sacha Villiers
> Hubbard of Hill House Plants.
>
> I'm concerned that the police might confront the wrong individual,

> because of you.
>
> Susan, Su_Texas my opinions
>

Oh, give me a break! That is the lamest, stupidest lie you've ever spun.
We didn't just fall off the turnip truck, kid. You posted that
information deliberately to start trouble, and, by the way, it's been
posted before by others in an attempt to begin trouble. That trouble was
theirs, alone. Now you get to play, too.

Since several of us on here have visited Sacha and can vouch for her,
you're really up the creek without a paddle...

... except for the one I may put where the Texas sun don't shine.

js

[FJae]

Jean Sue Libkind wrote:
> su-t...@webtv.net wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > =========================
> >
> > As usual, you're bonkers, off on tangents, & making threats, Sacha.
> >
> > My concern, as I stated at the beginning, is that you might not be
> > Sacha Villiers Hubbard.
> >
> > The information about this individual is posted (very widely & often, &
> > by you too) on usenet & the internet, & you could be using it to
> > impersonate her.
> >
> > I'm asking if anyone has checked to see if you are the Sacha Villiers
> > Hubbard of Hill House Plants.
> >
> > I'm concerned that the police might confront the wrong individual,
> > because of you.
> >
> > Susan, Su_Texas my opinions
> >
>
>
> Oh, give me a break! That is the lamest, stupidest lie you've ever spun.
> We didn't just fall off the turnip truck, kid. You posted that
> information deliberately to start trouble,

The one who may be impersonating another is the one who is causing the
trouble. why would someone post sooooo much personal information
either they are nuts OR they are impersonating someone else. And don't
think we fall for the I have met her crap...who would believe YOU? No
One. In Sacha's words: Nope. Wrong. Next

[FJae]

Is that what you call your former students Bi Polar?
You are the sick one and everyone knows it.

[Susan Cohen]

"Jean Sue Libkind" <jea...@bookschlepper.net> wrote in message
news:3g8khhF...@individual.net...

> su-t...@webtv.net wrote:
>
>> For legal reasons: I have never & do not now, give you, your KKKlan
>> (hal sanders, jeansue libkind, Q, Susan Cohen, JFlexer, Andy 3rd,
>> Breton, Adrav, etc.),

Let this whacko post proof that I ever did anythong of the kind, or cared
to.
I was one of those who kept asking others to make allowances for someone who
was obviously ill.

or anyone else, permission to post my personal
>> information. [However, Hal Sanders & Q have already posted some, & now
>> you have.]
>>
>> And I hope that others can use this statement, when they sue you.
>>
>> Susan, Su_Texas my opinions
>
>
> First of all, Susie-Que, I am not not and never have been a member of the
> Klu Klux Klan; I consider such allegations libelous and that the burden of
> proof is on you.

These idiots are preteing that we're "Korpse Kickers" because we don't
worship Diana the way they do.
If anything, *they * are the corpse kickers for stripping her of her
humanity.

SusanC

[Sacha]

On 2/6/05 16:50, in article kVFne.105$mb2.89@trnddc07, "Susan Cohen"
<flav...@verizon.net> wrote:

>
> "Jean Sue Libkind" <jea...@bookschlepper.net> wrote in message
> news:3g8khhF...@individual.net...
>> su-t...@webtv.net wrote:
>>
>>> For legal reasons: I have never & do not now, give you, your KKKlan
>>> (hal sanders, jeansue libkind, Q, Susan Cohen, JFlexer, Andy 3rd,
>>> Breton, Adrav, etc.),
>
> Let this whacko post proof that I ever did anythong of the kind, or cared
> to.
> I was one of those who kept asking others to make allowances for someone who
> was obviously ill.
>
> or anyone else, permission to post my personal
>>> information. [However, Hal Sanders & Q have already posted some, & now
>>> you have.]
>>>
>>> And I hope that others can use this statement, when they sue you.
>>>
>>> Susan, Su_Texas my opinions
>>
>>
>> First of all, Susie-Que, I am not not and never have been a member of the
>> Klu Klux Klan; I consider such allegations libelous and that the burden of
>> proof is on you.
>
> These idiots are preteing that we're "Korpse Kickers" because we don't
> worship Diana the way they do.
> If anything, *they * are the corpse kickers for stripping her of her
> humanity.
>
> SusanC

I did the same and even reported one person who was cruelly attacking Su-T
to his ISP. With the results that we've now been seeing for years. I wish
most truly that I hadn't bothered.
>
>>
<snip>

[FJae]

Jean Sue Libkind wrote:
> su-t...@webtv.net wrote:
>
> > For legal reasons: I have never & do not now, give you, your KKKlan
> > (hal sanders, jeansue libkind, Q, Susan Cohen, JFlexer, Andy 3rd,
> > Breton, Adrav, etc.), or anyone else, permission to post my personal
> > information. [However, Hal Sanders & Q have already posted some, & now
> > you have.]
> >
> > And I hope that others can use this statement, when they sue you.
> >
> > Susan, Su_Texas my opinions
>
>
> First of all, Susie-Que, I am not not and never have been a member of
> the Klu Klux Klan; I consider such allegations libelous and that the
> burden of proof is on you.
>
> Secondly, I consider the said Klu Klux Klan a terrorist organization, as
> does the US government and, given the political climate post 9/11, such
> charges are particularly onerous.
>
> Thirdly, as expressed in previous posts on your beloved Confederacy, you
> should know I'm not in the KKK since you don't see me at meetings.
>
> Finally, I have never posted any of your personal information on AGR or
> anywhere else; I have made reference to items in your biography which
> you yourself have supplied.
>
> 1. You said you were on chemotherapy for cancer; so, how's it going?
> 2. You have been abused by your family; so, how would they like to know
> you say that?

Well isn't that nice JS you have sank to an all time low.

> 3. You live in Texas; enough said.

Texas is great

> 4. You worship the confederacy, a lost cause. The only people I know who
> still do so (and I have lived in the south, honey chile) are rednecks.
> I'd wear a scarf in the sun, luv.

We told Hollie to but she just won't listen!

[Jean Sue Libkind]

FJae wrote:
> The one who may be impersonating another is the one who is causing the
> trouble. why would someone post sooooo much personal information
> either they are nuts OR they are impersonating someone else. And don't
> think we fall for the I have met her crap...who would believe YOU? No
> One. In Sacha's words: Nope. Wrong. Next

Pity you haven't believed me.....

js

[Jean Sue Libkind]

Dear FJae,

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my message which was
directed to another poster. It is not often that one finds someone these
days who has the time and is willing to expend it on correspondence,
particularly correspondence for other people. Your thoughtfulness will
not go unnoticed.

As for the particulars of your response, let me just assure you that
their sheer pathetic quality absolves you from blame... or any inclusion
in the intelligent classes. Based on your previously posted opinions
regarding education and learning, I am certain this will come as a great
relief to you.

Best wishes,
jeansue

[Q]

"FJae" <f_jo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:1117720114.4...@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

No. Actually, I'm just very very rude. -- Q
>

[Sacha]

On 2/6/05 17:35, in article 3g8qquF...@individual.net, "Jean Sue
Libkind" <jea...@bookschlepper.net> wrote:

It's not important. She's not important. You know who I am, so do quite a
few others here who have met me and my husband. I know who I am - now where
did I put that badge.....? ;-)

[Jean Sue Libkind]

Badges? Badges? We don't need no stinkin' badges......

--Treasure of the Sierra Madre (for those who wish an attribution)

js

[Sacha]

On 2/6/05 19:28, in article 3g91e2F...@individual.net, "Jean Sue
Libkind" <jea...@bookschlepper.net> wrote:

Can we opt for a tiara or three? And the jeans, of course.

[Jean Sue Libkind]

Sacha wrote:

>>>It's not important. She's not important. You know who I am, so do quite a
>>>few others here who have met me and my husband. I know who I am - now where
>>>did I put that badge.....? ;-)
>>
>>
>>Badges? Badges? We don't need no stinkin' badges......
>>
>>--Treasure of the Sierra Madre (for those who wish an attribution)
>>
>>js
>
>
> Can we opt for a tiara or three? And the jeans, of course.

Oh, yes. We can well do without badges but we must have tiaras!!!!

js

[Danny]

stupid QUNT, you clearly are RACIST.

[Danny]

only a prevert deranged fucked up looney would "get off" from other
peoples sadness/misfortunes. your one VERY sick COW.

[Danny]

On Thu, 02 Jun 2005 05:20:25 GMT, "jack" <jacke...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>
>"Danny" <m...@home.net> wrote in message
>news:voqs91do5lccsp4ii...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 19:33:21 +0100, Sacha
>> <sa...@weedsgarden506.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> >On 1/6/05 19:31, in article
>> >1117650686....@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com,

>"su-t...@webtv.net"
>> ><su-t...@webtv.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Sacha wrote:

>> >>> On 1/6/05 16:59, in article
>17187-429...@storefull-3135.bay.webtv.net,
>> >>> "su-t...@webtv.net" <su-t...@webtv.net> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> quote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> George Henry Child-Villiers, Viscount Villiers (M)
>> >>>>
>> >>>> b. 29 August 1948, d. circa 26 March 1998, #48366
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Pedigree, Last Edited=6 Sep 2004
>> >>>>
>> >>>> George Henry Child-Villiers, Viscount Villiers was the son of George
>> >>>> Francis Child-Villiers, 9th Earl of Jersey and Bianca Maria Luciana
>> >>>> Adriana Mottironi.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> He was born on 29 August 1948.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> He and an unknown person were divorced in 1973.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> He married, secondly, Sasha Hooper Valpy in 1974. He and Sasha Hooper
>> >>>> Valpy were divorced in 1988.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> He married, thirdly, Stephanie Penman in 1992. He died circa 26 March
>> >>>> 1998.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> He was styled as Viscount Villiers.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Child of George Henry Child-Villiers, Viscount Villiers and Sasha
>Hooper
>> >>>> Valpy:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> William Child-Villiers, 10th Earl of Jersey b. 1976
>> >>>>
>> >>>> http://thepeerage.com/p5116.htm
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ===============
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Susan, Su_Texas my opinions

>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> This is very old news, Susan and has been posted here many times in
>order to

>> >>> try to embarrass me. It didn't work any of those times, either. Now,

>of
>> >>> course, you have laid yourself open to all the information that is out
>there
>> >>> about YOU being posted here. You types never learn, do you.

>> >>> And as my ex husband interested you so much, you have the date of his
>death
>> >>> wrong.

>> >>> I would like to point out to you that I have *never, ever* posted the
>names
>> >>> of your family here or PK's family But now, you've moved the
>goalposts, so

>> >>> I see no reason to refrain from doing so in future. And yes, I do

>have some
>> >>> of that information - again, unsolicited and sent to me by people who
>are

>> >>> horrified at your behaviour. I know your real name and I know the

>name of
>> >>> some of PK's children, I know her date of birth, I know the age of her
>> >>> husband and I know the nationality of her first husband. The rest will
>> >>> follow.
>> >>>

>> >>> BTW, PK will be *very* angry with you for posting this. She gets in
>the
>> >>> most awful lather when my credentials for knowing rather more than she
>does,
>> >>> are published to readers of this group.

>> >>> --
>> >>>
>> >>> Sacha
>> >>> (remove the weeds for email)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>

>> >> =========================
>> >>
>> >> As usual, you're bonkers, off on tangents, & making threats, Sacha.
>> >>
>> >> My concern, as I stated at the beginning, is that you might not be
>> >> Sacha Villiers Hubbard.
>> >>
>> >> The information about this individual is posted (very widely & often, &
>> >> by you too) on usenet & the internet, & you could be using it to
>> >> impersonate her.
>> >>
>> >> I'm asking if anyone has checked to see if you are the Sacha Villiers
>> >> Hubbard of Hill House Plants.
>> >>
>> >> I'm concerned that the police might confront the wrong individual,

>> >> because of you.
>> >>
>> >> Susan, Su_Texas my opinions
>> >>
>> >
>> >Don't be so ridiculous. You've pulled a stunt that is going to blow
>right
>> >up in your face, Pearl.
>>
>> yet another CLEAR THREAT.
>
>She"s to stupid to realize that any libel; writ she does serve will become
>virtually null and void because of her own behaviour.
>

Sadcow is fucked, and she KNOW It, all her own doing.

[Danny]

On Thu, 02 Jun 2005 09:23:42 GMT, Brian Pears <bpe...@freenet.co.uk>
wrote:

roflmao the words of a wise old pervert eh Bloody Pervert.

[GR]

"Jean Sue Libkind" <jea...@bookschlepper.net> wrote in message
news:3g91e2F...@individual.net...

---------
I'm glad you quoted from the sanitized 1948 screenplay, Jean Sue. There's
an awful lot of **********s in the 0riginal 1935 novel! :)
GR

[Danny]

figures you'd get invloved in something ELSE that is NON of yuor
business.

>>
>>>
><snip>

[Jean Sue Libkind]

Danny wrote:

> figures you'd get invloved in something ELSE that is NON of yuor
> business.

You could probably type better if you'd stop stupping cows.

js

[Danny]

at least yuor honest about you VIOLENT thoughts.

[Jean Sue Libkind]

GR wrote:
> "Jean Sue Libkind" <jea...@bookschlepper.net> wrote in message
> news:3g91e2F...@individual.net...

>>

>>Badges? Badges? We don't need no stinkin' badges......
>
> ---------
> I'm glad you quoted from the sanitized 1948 screenplay, Jean Sue. There's
> an awful lot of **********s in the 0riginal 1935 novel! :)
> GR

You know me, always prudent!!!!! ;)

js

[Danny]

lost it in your cowdung?

[Breton]

I am particularly ashamed that this person is apparently Canadian.
Clearly a glowing example of all that is wrong in the Ontario school
system.

Breton

[canetoad]

Were you breastfed Danny?

[Jean Sue Libkind]

I'm ashamed she's in North America.

js

[Danny]

pick em up at Bruger King, kids will get a laugh out of it.

[Danny]

why?

[Danny]

and pathetic.

[Danny]

lots of things I could probably do, none of them yuor concern though.

[Susan Cohen]

"canetoad" <canedel...@fastmail.invalid.fm> wrote in message
news:429f726c$0$16857$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...

Oh, I don;t think that's what makes people hypocrites.

SusanC

[Lux]

It's not IN the NT. It's in the OT!!

Susan Cohen wrote:
> "GR" <G...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:d7l97f$pn4$1...@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
> >
> > "Lux" <luxpe...@aol.com> wrote in message
> > news:1117654797.6...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >> An educated person would not require a reference, nor would think that
> >> I had composed these words, moron.
> > -------------
> > Absolutely right, fatua mea.
> > I did not need a reference nor would I ever have thought you
> > intellectually
> > capable of emulating Saint Jerome's translation of the original Hebrew
> > text.
>
> & not everyone reads the NT.
>
> SusanC
>
> > But if you are going to cite the words of others, ancient or contemporary,
> > it is after all the custom to place them within quotation marks. It
> > displays yet again your ignorance.
> > GR
> > ------------
> >>
> >> GR wrote:
> >> > "Lux" <luxpe...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:1117641735.9...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> >> > > Quomodo cecidisti de caelo, O Lucifer,
> >> > > qui mane oriebaris?
> >> > -----------
> >> >
> >> > Typical! Not even your own words and no reference. No matter. It is
> > Isaiah
> >> > 14:12.
> >> >
> >> > Sapis vere, o filia diaboli
> >> > GR
> >> > >
> >>
> >
> >

[Lux]

Which translation appears in the Vulgate, where it is most commonly
read. Having completely drained a minor joke made off the top of the
head of whatever wit is might have possessed with your pseudo-erudition
and pedantry, I think you can consider your job as a dullard well and
truly done. Perhaps you can entertain us with some hilarious quotes
from the Book of Common Prayer.

GR wrote:
> "Lux" <luxpe...@aol.com> wrote in message

> news:1117664791.6...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > Known simply as the Vulgate
>
> Not quite. It is the *entire*, 4th Century biblical compilation undertaken
> by Eusebius Hieronymus which is known as 'the Vulgate' ('Vulgata editio')
> (and that, only from from c. the Fourteenth Century onwards).
> I was being more precise, referring only to the verse translated by Saint
> Jerome as quoted by you.
> GR - Flatus eruditionis, spero, in recessus obscuros animi tui.
> ------------
>
> , flatus. There is no need to use quotation
> > marks around a biblical reference, nor was adding the weight of a
> > citation to Isaiah part of the joke. I understand you have no sense of
> > humor, in addition to your other unattractive qualities.

> >
> > GR wrote:
> > > "Lux" <luxpe...@aol.com> wrote in message

> > > news:1117654797.6...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > > > An educated person would not require a reference, nor would think that
> > > > I had composed these words, moron.
> > > -------------
> > > Absolutely right, fatua mea.
> > > I did not need a reference nor would I ever have thought you
> intellectually
> > > capable of emulating Saint Jerome's translation of the original Hebrew
> text.

[Lux]

No, actually, how do you think I would elicit that remark from Google?
You are the one who claims to make constant literary and mythological
references, but all that ever comes out of your mouth is insults to
people who don't like your friend, and links to Hello magazine. If I
were to pretend to erudition, I certainly would not do so to a bunch of
jerks I don't even know. Do the air a favor and save your breath,
holler girl.

Jean Sue Libkind wrote:
> GR wrote:
> > "Lux" <luxpe...@aol.com> wrote in message
> > news:1117654797.6...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> >>An educated person would not require a reference, nor would think that
> >>I had composed these words, moron.
> >
> > -------------
> > Absolutely right, fatua mea.
> > I did not need a reference nor would I ever have thought you intellectually
> > capable of emulating Saint Jerome's translation of the original Hebrew text.
> > But if you are going to cite the words of others, ancient or contemporary,
> > it is after all the custom to place them within quotation marks. It
> > displays yet again your ignorance.
> > GR
>
>

> She's the one who didn't pay attention at school and it shows. Google
> must be a godsend for her; she can pretend to be erudite.
>
> js

[pk4...@yepmail.net]

No, actually, how do you think I would elicit that remark from Google?

>Don't expect a coherent answer. She just knows she gets most of her material there....the rest she obviously gleans from us...every time I use a word, she echoes it...'erudite' being the latest. I notice she does the same with your vocabulary....even though she thinks 'Lux' is a soap.

You are the one who claims to make constant literary and mythological
references, but all that ever comes out of your mouth is insults to
people who don't like your friend, and links to Hello magazine.

>Yes, Hello ! 's trashloid articles are right up her crooked street. Her education is a 'myth' alright !

If I were to pretend to erudition, I certainly would not do so to a
bunch of
jerks I don't even know. Do the air a favor and save your breath,
holler girl.

>Any sort of ref to literature is lost on Blech Face.
She watches too much Chris Matthews.

[GR]

"Lux" <luxpe...@aol.com> wrote in message

news:1117749977.6...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

> Which translation appears in the Vulgate, where it is most commonly
> read. Having completely drained a minor joke made off the top of the
> head of whatever wit is might have possessed with your pseudo-erudition
> and pedantry, I think you can consider your job as a dullard well and
> truly done. Perhaps you can entertain us with some hilarious quotes
> from the Book of Common Prayer.

----------------
I do not 'entertain' people with 'hilarious quotes' from religious texts.
Such blasphemies I leave to the likes of you, Ms 'Perpetual Light'.
Nor do I do try to pass off the scholarship of others as my own work - the
latest example being only yesterday in your post concerning 'King Lear', in
the thread: 'Wicked StepMother vs van Cutsems'.
GR
----------------

[Lux]

I did not quote from Lear, as I share Tolstoy's view of Shakespeare.
You must be having a senior moment. Why is a heretic worried about
being a blasphemer?