understanding cps apologists (cross-posted)
maggie_...@yahoo.com
three-point strategy...........they seek to exploit and exaggerate
extreme examples of extreme parenting deficiencies and emphasize
urgency...........they characterize opposition to cps as ad hominem,
unconcerned, or child-hating..............the offer false choices such
as either supporting cps or allowing parents to abuse
children...............
BreastImplantAwareness.org
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/blog.htm
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/betty-wirsen.htm
I want to publicly thank the silent readers of these newsgroups who
have pointed out the inconsistencies in Betty Jean's 'history' ...
while she is claiming to want no 'publicity' ... shocking reads.
dragonsgirl
was an abused child?
You only had to ask, I would have told you myself.
I don't know why you feel like you have to sneak around 'cloak and dagger'
to get your 'info'.
But, certainly, by all means, if it makes you feel good to berate the abuses
of children, mentally diabled persons, etc...then carry on with the 'work'
you do.
"BreastImplantAwareness.org" <B...@mundo.com> wrote in message
news:4mj592t6f8e20816j...@4ax.com...
BreastImplantAwareness.org
your stories several times to suit your needs at the moment ... and
that your Mentors are my losing plaintiff's from quackwatch and you
continue their 5 + year old campaigns against me like an obsessed
terrorist.
You are a destructive liar ... and so obsessed with me ... I will
continue to be grateful to those who know your patterns of deception
for pointing out your MANY inconsistencies.
I have no doubt that CPS like the Pharma / Med Device industries ...
use loud mouthed rude liars like you to further their interests.
dragonsgirl
You are so full of yourself and your 'imagination'.
I don't know what 'stories' you think I have changed, but you can bet your
ass that you can't PROVE it because no such thing has ever happened.
I am honest, and I am fair. I have few biases, and most of them consist of
the willingness for parents to care for their children properly, and stay
clean off drugs. I am skeptical about both.
Other than that, I am very willing to listen to both sides of anything that
anyone has to say.
Including you...I have listened to you, just as I have everyone
else...that's why it's on my calendar to remove from my site one of the
statements that you made...I found it to be out of context and nothing wrong
with it after a lot of research. Not only that, but I have also agreed with
you that the pictures of you that were changed should not have been done and
should not have been posted.
Further, I agree that your case with Barrett should have never been
filed...that there was nothing wrong with you reposting the statements of
others...yet, one thing that I don't agree with, along the same token, is
that you have a hissy fit about those who do the same thing that you are
defending YOURSELF against.
You seem to have two standards...those in which the rest of us are to live
by, and those in which YOU live by.
You talk about my abuse as a child as if it were some flippant little thing
that is no big deal.
You also talk as if I abused my son...I believe your exact term was
'injured'...he was neither injured, NOR abused.
He was popped in the face after it was evident that he was DRUNK and looked
as though he was going to hit me.
Further, you say I was 'fined'...nothing of the kind ever happened...the
$3000 was for travel expenses and an attorney, NOT fines...my attorney was
confident that the charges would be dropped when it was revealed that my son
made a threatening gesture that prompted me to hit him. However, several
more court dates would have had to be scheduled and I could not afford the
travel from Chicago. There was no fine, and I have no record for ANY
criminal actions what so ever. And I am sure that, since my county's
records are online, you would have already posted it if there were.
Tell me...do you show all your benefactors the love that you have shown the
rest of the world?
http://www.gatago.com/misc/headlines/17687096.html
BreastImplantAwareness.org
>I am honest
You are dishonest ... your stories don't match up ... and when caught
in your lies ... you just lie more. You have given legal opinions that
mirror the desires of my losing plaintiff, Stephen Barrett and his
crossdressing Troll co-plaintiff, Terry Polevoy ... who was caught
parading around Usenet calling himself Vera Teasdale.
You fool only the other fools / shills and flacks.
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/blog.htm
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/ss.html
Regarding the out of context and never posted comments that Wirsen
repeats about me
dragonsgirl
> Betty lies:
>
> >I am honest
>
>
You are full of shit.
Just like you state that you have no idea if my mother ever had breast
implant, and I posted the information to my site for you to clear the matter
up, yet you refuse to acknowledge that...of course, if you did could could
no longer claim that my mother didn't exist and was just a figment of my
imagination, while simultaneously saying that you would like to raise
awareness to the dangers of breast implants in her name.
Do you realize how idiotic you look saying something like that?
Dedications to a woman that you claim didn't exist and never had implants.
Talk about DISHONEST.
... and when caught
> in your lies ... you just lie more.
You are definitely full of shit.
That's YOUR MO, not mine.
You have given legal opinions that
> mirror the desires of my losing plaintiff, Stephen Barrett and his
> crossdressing Troll co-plaintiff, Terry Polevoy ... who was caught
> parading around Usenet calling himself Vera Teasdale.
I have also given opinions that 'mirror' YOUR opinions, does that make me
YOUR best friend???
>
> You fool only the other fools / shills and flacks.
I'm neither a shill or a flack.
And I am certainly not on usenet pissing and moaning about how broke I am
while saying that I am globe hopping.
Tell me, how DOES one afford all that travel and legal fees on 'zero
income'?
Inquiring minds want to know.
http://www.gatago.com/misc/headlines/17687096.html
BreastImplantAwareness.org
Wirsen's contradictory statements...
Here she claims that her father and mother were married for 35 years
... in others she claims she never knew her father til a teen...
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/betty-wirsen.htm
http://groups.google.co.cr/group/alt.support.breast-implant/msg/874085145aba1100?dmode=source&hl=en
In 1968 my father was arrested for statuatory rape.
He was 19. His girlfriend was almost 17.
My father was a bit of a 'bad boy', with the leather jacket and collar
upturned, greased back hair, etc.
Her father did not like him, and in an effort to keep him away from
his
daughter, he filed charges that were utterly untrue.
My father has been married to that girl he 'raped' for almost 35 years
now.
BreastImplantAwareness.org
http://groups.google.co.cr/group/alt.support.child-protective-services/msg/2ad970e3aee05498?dmode=source&hl=en
I know how that feels. I did not meet my own biological father until
I was
14 years old.
How could her father have stayed with her mother for 35 years when she
didn't meet him til she was 14 ... ?????
dragonsgirl
> Again I thank the non-posters here for pointing out so many of
> Wirsen's contradictory statements...
>
> Here she claims that her father and mother were married for 35 years
> ... in others she claims she never knew her father til a teen...
Show it.
My parents were not married for 35 years, and I have made it CLEAR that my
mother and father separated when my mother found out she was pregnant with
me on Christmas day, 1967.
My father has been married to my STEP MOTHER for over 35 years...
Get it?
That's why I was not raised with my sister that you talk about, and why my
sister was no relation to my mother, as I told you previously, but you
refuse to understand that.
There are no lies there, only your fantasies.
Your 'pantie liners' are showing.
Greegor
> In 1968 my father was arrested for statuatory rape.
> He was 19. His girlfriend was almost 17.
That wouldn't even be illegal in many states now.
Many allow a four year age difference as normal
even if one is just under the age of consent and
one is just over.
And your gramps lodged a false criminal charge
on this man to keep him away from your mother?
To keep your father away from your mother?
Remember when I asked you if you had
some issues about male hatred and your father?
Didn't you think this qualified?
BreastImplantAwareness.org
Now someone just sent me something Wirsen naming herself after Dragon
... her stepfather?
Is that the one who she claims "abused" her and then killed himself?
Is that who she is honoring?
Which father beat her up at 16?
Wish I didn't know this woman ... but her interrogations and lies
about me life began at the same time the Supreme Court of California
agreed to hear Terry Polevoy's case against me ... and voila ...
WitchWirsen began her attacks!
dragonsgirl
"Greegor" <Gre...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1150478691.7...@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Betty wrote
> > In 1968 my father was arrested for statuatory rape.
> > He was 19. His girlfriend was almost 17.
>
> That wouldn't even be illegal in many states now.
> Many allow a four year age difference as normal
> even if one is just under the age of consent and
> one is just over.
>
> And your gramps lodged a false criminal charge
> on this man to keep him away from your mother?
He was not my grandfather. There was no relationship between me and him.
>
> To keep your father away from your mother?
I highly doubt that one could have filed a statutory rape to keep my father
away from my mother...my mother was 21 years old in 1968.
Don't believe me?
Ask Ilena...she knows that my mother was 21 in '68...as she said my mother
was only months older than her.
It was my step mother, who was almost 17 in 1968.
>
> Remember when I asked you if you had
> some issues about male hatred and your father?
I hate my father because he was charged with statutory rape in 1968, before
I was even born?
And with a woman who was not my mother?
A woman who later married him and has been married to him for 35 years now?
Are you KIDDING????
I hardly hold against ANYONE the fact that they were 19, dating a 16 year
old who's father didn't like him.
If YOU are that much of an asshole, great for you. Doesn't mean I am.
>
> Didn't you think this qualified?
Qualified for what, exactly?
>
dragonsgirl
>
> Now someone just sent me something Wirsen naming herself after Dragon
> ... her stepfather?
>
> Is that the one who she claims "abused" her and then killed himself?
> Is that who she is honoring?
LOL
Never heard of a woman being married more than once?
Like, ummmm, a Mirowitz Rosenthal Lord?
I suppose that you think that my mother could not have POSSIBLY been married
again after her husband died?
Talk about a ditz.
>
> Which father beat her up at 16?
>
> Wish I didn't know this woman ... but her interrogations
Wait...before we go any further, let me whip out the bright light and rubber
hose...it would go along percfectly with all your assertions about boogie
men and 'interrogations'
and lies
> about me life began at the same time the Supreme Court of California
> agreed to hear Terry Polevoy's case against me ... and voila ...
> WitchWirsen began her attacks!
So, now I'm Terry Polevoy?
LOL
You must read a lot of spy novels or something to come up wtih this stuff.
The whole world is out to get you.
LOL
www.bettywirsen.com/ilena%20rosenthal.htm
BreastImplantAwareness.org
So was it your stepfather you call "Dragon" who beat you up at 16 or
your birth father?
Are you honoring Dragon who you claimed "abused" you and then killed
himself?
For readers ... believe nothing she says about me ...
And no, i don't believe you are Terry Polevoy ... you are posting his
agenda tho ... and began doing so 2 years ago when our case began it's
way to the Supreme Court of California ... soon after I beat his two
co-plaintiffs. That was the time he was parading around as Vera
Teasdale and Coleah and O'leary and Polevoy's teammates hired a PI to
hunt me down.
BreastImplantAwareness.org
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/ss.html
You call a woman who had an oath to lie to her 'sisters' about the
President of Inamed for years while she tucked him into her 'support
group' "an implanted woman" ... when in fact, her oath and allegiance
were to him ... not the women, deny it til you grow a conscience.
Your website is a showcase that takes quotes I wrote her entirely out
of context ... and then express your admiration for this woman who
publicly harassed me for 10 years while connected with the industry,
particulalry the former President of Inamed.
Most of the quotes that I did say, were in a private letter to Susan
Schaezler .... never posted by me. You lie to your readers about that
too.
Your wirtings sound like Stephen Barrett's quack pieces ... not your
style at all. You make absurd assumptions and post them as fact ...
identical to the Quackwatch Propaganda Teams professional smear
techniques.
All of your quotes about me are out of context ... not just one of
them!
In fact, it's as if someone took a photo of George Bush's head and put
it on the body of Pink ... so erroneous and false and contrived is the
message.
dragonsgirl
>
> www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/ss.html
>
>
> You call a woman who had an oath to lie to her 'sisters' about the
> President of Inamed for years while she tucked him into her 'support
> group' "an implanted woman" ... when in fact, her oath and allegiance
> were to him ... not the women, deny it til you grow a conscience.
Please provide me with a copy of the 'oath and allegiance' if you will.
Regardless of anything else, she was a breast implanted woman and there was
no call for the things you said to her.
None what so ever.
Ilena, I don't talk to dogs like that.
But you think it's ok to talk to a woman harmed by breast implants that way?
Or any other human being?
>
>
> Your website is a showcase that takes quotes I wrote her entirely out
> of context ... and then express your admiration
I expressed Admiration?
Please, do show us where?
I have no idea how one might 'admire' someone they don't even KNOW!
for this woman who
> publicly harassed me for 10 years while connected with the industry,
> particulalry the former President of Inamed.
I've seen many many posts in which she asked you questions, Ilena...and as
for dirty deeds done dirt cheap...YOU WERE the one discussing her personal
issues with defense attorney.
Yeah, but of course, THAT is certainly discarded, isn't it?
>
> Most of the quotes that I did say, were in a private letter to Susan
> Schaezler .... never posted by me. You lie to your readers about that
> too.
I lie about nothing.
I stated that they were in usenet archives, and they are.
You never denied those statements, you never denied the validity of the
letters, and just because they were sent personally does not mean that they
are to be discarded as if they never happened.
She chose to post the words that you wrote to her, and you DID write them.
They show an exceptionally nasty dispostition toward another human being.
I do not care what your reason.
You could have simply IGNORED it and would have had my respect for that.
You did not, however, and chose to talk to that woman in a manner MOST
unbecoming someone of your 'stature'.
And many more, Ilena, don't even bullshit anyone...you know as well as I do
that SS was not the only one, and you also know as well as I do that it's
been an awful long dang time since SS posted on usenet yet you continue to
drag her name around like mud on your boots.
That tells alot IMHO.
>
> Your wirtings sound like Stephen Barrett's quack pieces ... not your
> style at all. You make absurd assumptions and post them as fact ...
> identical to the Quackwatch Propaganda Teams professional smear
> techniques.
Please post the 'assumptions' that I have presented as fact.
I would like to see the error of my ways, and unlike many do admit them.
Prove it.
>
> All of your quotes about me are out of context ... not just one of
> them!
Hmmmm.
No.
I don't think so.
But if I should happen to run across any more that are 'out of context' I
will admit it, just as I have with the one that I researched.
>
> In fact, it's as if someone took a photo of George Bush's head and put
> it on the body of Pink ... so erroneous and false and contrived is the
> message.
So, in essence, you say that the quotes I have presented are ALL false and
out of context?
So then you posting the real estate transactions of Rodney Hayton was out of
context?
You making threats to call other's families and jobs were false and out of
context?
You telling SS that letting her live was the worst thing her doctor ever
did?
How on earth can you claim that those words were taken out of context?
There are no two ways around some of your statements Ilena.
FYI...'false' means you didn't say it. 'Out Of Context' means that it was
presented in a way that you did not intend when you wrote it.
Are you trying to tell me that you did not 'mean' to post Rodney Haytons
real estate transactions?
Are you telling me that you did not 'mean' to threaten to call families and
employers of breast implanted women?
Are you trying to tell me that you did not 'mean' to tell SS that letting
her live was the worst thing Dr Dobke ever did?
Or are you trying to say that you never said those things...they are
'false'?
Your EXCUSES are NOT the same thing as 'out of context' or 'false'.
It doesn't matter how rude, how crude, how libelous, how vicious, it seems
that you stand behind your words, eh?
BreastImplantAwareness.org
>I lie about nothing.
dragonsgirl
dragonsgirl
>
>
> So was it your stepfather you call "Dragon" who beat you up at 16 or
> your birth father?
>
> Are you honoring Dragon who you claimed "abused" you and then killed
> himself?
Wow, you really are a vicious witch, claiming that a man you don't even
know, or know anything about abused me and then killed himself.
That love...you know, it just pours out of you.
Again...for all those Ilena's out there...never heard of a woman who's
widowed being married after her husband's death?
BreastImplantAwareness.org
never to have joined the quackwatch Smear Campaign against me ... but
you did ...
Now there are so many descrepancies that are showing up in your
ravings, and the case that you have been repeating disinformation
about is moving ahead in the Supreme Court of California ... I'm
getting the players in line.
I've been sent in the last few days from people who have watched your
vicious antics for years conflicting accounts of your alleged "step
father" abuse ... as well as a message claiming you named yourself
"Dragon's Girl" out of respect for Dragon ... apparently your
stepfather (or one of them)
So that was my question that set you in another Witch Rant ...
So I will repeat the question to my constant libeler and dark shadow
...
Is it your stepfather you claim abused you that was "Dragon" or
another that you are honoring with calling yoruself "Dragon's Girl."
Further, there are several descripancies in your story about your
mother's breast implants that have been mailed to me too.
You want the publicity ... you are sure getting it!
dragonsgirl
> Scream on Wirsen ... frankly, my preference would have been for you
> never to have joined the quackwatch Smear Campaign against me ... but
> you did ...
LOL
>
> Now there are so many descrepancies that are showing up in your
> ravings, and the case that you have been repeating disinformation
> about is moving ahead in the Supreme Court of California ... I'm
> getting the players in line.
>
> I've been sent in the last few days from people who have watched your
> vicious antics for years
(though I have been on usenet for less than 2 years, which does not
constitute 'years' the plural) LOL
conflicting accounts of your alleged "step
> father" abuse ... as well as a message claiming you named yourself
> "Dragon's Girl" out of respect for Dragon ... apparently your
> stepfather (or one of them)
>
> So that was my question that set you in another Witch Rant ...
>
> So I will repeat the question to my constant libeler and dark shadow
> ...
>
> Is it your stepfather you claim abused you that was "Dragon" or
> another that you are honoring with calling yoruself "Dragon's Girl."
Read my fingers this time 'ditz'...
My mother was MARRIED after her husband died...do you get it now?
Dragon is NOT my deceased step father.
Further, capitolizing words for emphasis is not 'screaming'.
>
>
> Further, there are several descripancies in your story about your
> mother's breast implants that have been mailed to me too.
Because they are, or because that's what you want to see? Just like you
wanted to believe that my half sister was my mother's child?
Like you wanted to believe that MM was comitting fraud because she got
pensions etc from a 'man' she was not married to?
Just like you believed that my mother was a figment of my imagination
beccause you didn't have any 'evidence' of her existence?
Just like you bellieve that WIll is Mark Probert?
Just like you once thought that Mark Probert was a dead psychic
communicating with you from beyond? LOL
You believe whatever you like Ilena....my mission in life is not to prove
anything to you. I care not a whit WHAT you think.
>
> You want the publicity ... you are sure getting it!
Watch it now, your 'pantie liners' are showing for all the world to see.
BreastImplantAwareness.org
never to have joined the quackwatch Smear Campaign against me ... but
you did ...
Now there are so many descrepancies that are showing up in your
ravings, and the case that you have been repeating disinformation
about is moving ahead in the Supreme Court of California ... I'm
getting the players in line.
I've been sent in the last few days from people who have watched your
vicious antics for years conflicting accounts of your alleged "step
father" abuse ... as well as a message claiming you named yourself
"Dragon's Girl" out of respect for Dragon ... apparently your
stepfather (or one of them)
It is quite nauseating to read your rants about family members of
yours ... living and dead ... revealing their drug and sexual
escapades... ever screaming that you don't want 'publicity' ... who
knows what percent of what you say about them is true.
You have also posted several outright lies and some libelous
statements (apparently you don't know the difference) about my life
... repeating the false claims made by those closely connected with
Terry Polevoy (Vera Teasdale in drag) and Stephen Barrett.
Further, there are several descripancies in your story about your
mother's breast implants that have been mailed to me too.
You want the publicity ... you are sure getting it!
dragonsgirl
Ilena, reposting and reposting does NOT make something true or valid, in
spite of your wishes that it did.
It's simply redundant...and often times shows your lack of creativity,
honesty, and class, enormous lack of class.
LOL
"BreastImplantAwareness.org" <B...@mundo.com> wrote in message
news:d3r892pa2nm6jgphb...@4ax.com...
Greegor
where Illena's face was photoshopped onto
various bodies.
Is that smear or logic?
Ron
Neither, just stupid.
Ron
dragonsgirl
"Ron" <apositi...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:KM3lg.250631$5Z.139730@dukeread02...
Greg doesn't relate appropriately.
Betty HAS a page on her site that has a LINK to a page with photos of Ilena
Rosenthal on it.
Betty also states on the page with the link:
"Ilena Rosenthal became the victim of parody some years back, and has
expressed her displeasure over the representations of her repeatedly.
One only need look at the renditions to realize that she has every right to
hold dislike for them"
I didn't make the pictures, didn't post the pictures, and have said many
times that I don't agree with them.
Ignored.
Just like anything that can't be used AGAINST, it's ignored.
>
>
Will Ketcher
Rosenthal was first to put up libelous webpages on her non-profit
webspace. Labeled as her "mine enemies" --- Ilena's pages were up for a
very long time before any parody pages went up in retaliation by anyone
else.
Others have taken their pages down in good faith during periods of
'cease fire' --- but Ilena Rosenthal never has.
Ilena Rosenthal has no reason, or right to complain.
dragonsgirl
"Will Ketcher" <will_k...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1150632069....@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
I'm certain that it's been a two way street and Ilena was the initial
agressor with the web pages and the photos.
I hope you don't misunderstand what I am saying with my statement above
that's copied from my web site...
My meaning is that two wrongs don't make a right. The pictures posted of
Ilena are pretty vulgar...some of them, and I understand fully why they
would piss her off, at the same time, I also understand why someone (several
authors as I was told) would WANT to piss her off.
Again two wrongs don't make a right, and where many have backed off their
arguments with her, she continues to use their names in her campaigns.
And yes, like you, I find it interesting that Ilena knew full well who
Mplant was, yet continued to have conversations with him. Now, years later,
she hounds the facts of the dealings of another with him.
You can't foul when you are doing the same thing/s that you point out others
for.
>
Coleah
"dragonsgirl" <drago...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:sZclg.119015$dW3....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "Will Ketcher" <will_k...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1150632069....@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > Anyone watching this board over a period of years, knows Ilena
> > Rosenthal was first to put up libelous webpages on her non-profit
> > webspace. Labeled as her "mine enemies" --- Ilena's pages were up for a
> > very long time before any parody pages went up in retaliation by anyone
> > else.
> >
> > Others have taken their pages down in good faith during periods of
> > 'cease fire' --- but Ilena Rosenthal never has.
> >
> > Ilena Rosenthal has no reason, or right to complain.
>
> I'm certain that it's been a two way street and Ilena was the initial
> agressor with the web pages and the photos.
My goodness yes, she sure was. She still has shit-list webpages up about
breast implant women who have not been heard from for years, but Ilena keeps
her hate-vigil going. It's like she is obsessed with her 'claim to fame'
which is what those pages have become for her. The non-profit foundation
pays for more shit-list webpages than it does for any information about the
dangers of breast implants. That in itself paints a picture of Ilena's
real crusade in life.
> I hope you don't misunderstand what I am saying with my statement above
> that's copied from my web site...
>
> My meaning is that two wrongs don't make a right. The pictures posted of
> Ilena are pretty vulgar...some of them, and I understand fully why they
> would piss her off, at the same time, I also understand why someone
(several
> authors as I was told) would WANT to piss her off.
Yes, many people contributing their artistic renditions, or parody's as you
refer to them. Not to piss anyone off. Many felt that Ilena's shit-list
webpages were vulgar and wished to freely express themselves as they
artistically envisioned.
> Again two wrongs don't make a right, and where many have backed off their
> arguments with her, she continues to use their names in her campaigns.
Who is to say that anything is 'wrong'.......
Oh, you mean like where Ilena states things as pure fact rather than using
"I think" statements about all her 'assumptions'?
Mark Probert
None of the above.
"Not needed" is more appropriate.
Coleah
"Mark Probert" <markp...@lumbercartel.com> wrote in message
news:BBelg.485$PG4...@fe12.lga...
Everyone view people's artistic freedom of expression differently......
dragonsgirl
"Coleah" <col...@pacifier.com> wrote in message
news:129auom...@corp.supernews.com...
I don't think the complaint is about the photos, the complaint is that I
'posted' them...though I did not, and posted the link to them.
>
>
>
Will Ketcher
only provide her with some small measure of 'emphamy' ------ but Ilena
Rosenthal thrives best with negative attention ---- she orgasms from it
--- she makes her 'free speech' handlers happy.
She attempts beating people's knees with a stick ----- if turn about
becomes fair play, and she can't handle it ------ she calls, parents,
employers, and screams like a banshee.
Will Ketcher
Until Ilena Rosenthal removes her abusive and libelous webpages ----
it's 'open season' and she is fair game.
Greegor
Why? So the newsgroup and blog posts
that smeared Illena and started this
could remain unchallenged?
Do you realize that the fact that you
are in or connected with a group whose
intent and purpose is to harass might just
have a little to do with your 'open season'?
Betty's big complaint about Illena has been
how Illena treated somebody.
Does that complaint hold up considering:
A. How Betty treats people
B. Betty's connection with a POSSE whose
entire purpose is to harass others?
C. Betty had no business other than
harassment to even be in the breast
implant survivors group in the first
place.
Will Ketcher
attack, there is no comment made to her? It is only when Ilena
Rosenthal comes out on the attack, that fur begins to fly.
If you have watched this board for any length of time at all --- you
will have noticed times of peace when Ilena is absent. You would have
noticed others have many times created webpages about her ---- and then
taken them down in the good faith of making change.
Never once has Ilena Rosenthal taken down her abusive and libelous
pages for even a nano second.
Most of Ilena Rosenthal's abusive webpages are on sick and ill women
harmed by products which Ms. Rosenthal claims to be advocating against.
Until Ilena Rosenthal changes, and the abusive use of her non-profit
webspace is handled differently, it should be 'open season' on Ilena
Rosenthal. Ilena Rosenthal likes to think she can segregate her life
into little compartments keeping certain things separate. Life doesn't
operate like that.
Ilena Rosenthal's 'private' life, her family life, her business
relationships, her real estate business ----- none of that is
segregated and it is 'fair game.'
dragonsgirl
> Will Ketcher wrote:
> > Ms Betty --- Your posting of the link isn't
> > inappropriate or wrong. Until Ilena Rosentha
> >l removes her abusive and libelous webpages ----
> > it's 'open season' and she is fair game.
>
> Why? So the newsgroup and blog posts
> that smeared Illena and started this
> could remain unchallenged?
You don't see anything wrong with Ilena telling breast implanted women, a
group in which she is a sworn advocate, that she wished them dead? Posting
their personal information? Accusing them of fraud when none was comitted?
Let's turn the tables a bit and make a scenario of the same nature in which
you cna relate...
Suppose that you go to a family advocate with your issues with DFS.
In the course of giving him/her background information to help you with your
case, you divulge quite a bit to them.
Then, let's just suppose that for whatever reason, you and that person have
a falling out.
Now....let's suppose that person goes to your DFS hearing and talks to the
DFS attorney about your personal information.
Or, worse yet...calls your family and fills their heads with bull that in
trun causes THEM to side with DFS about the removal of your child and your
child is taken all because you pissed off the person who WAS YOUR ADVOCATE.
It's not right Greg. And in that case I would defend you just like I defend
the breast implant women who have been targets of the same.
You think about that one for a bit.
Would you call the family rights person 'professional' for doing as they
did, regardless of the reason of your falling out?
Would you appreciate the family rights person advertising web pages about
their OPINION of you all over the internet?
How would YOU feel, given the same circumstances, but with a different
theme?
>
> Do you realize that the fact that you
> are in or connected with a group whose
> intent and purpose is to harass might just
> have a little to do with your 'open season'?
You have it on good authority and with absolute proof who Will Ketcher is,
and who Will Ketcher is associated with?
That's a pretty blunt statment Greg.
Especially when you state that the intent and purpose of the 'group' is to
harass.
How might you know who the 'group' is, and what the 'group's' 'intent and
purpose' is?
For I talk to many of these women, and many more besides the ones you see
here...and I know of no 'group' or 'intent and purpose' as you describe.
>
> Betty's big complaint about Illena has been
> how Illena treated somebody.
NOT how Ilena treated SOMEBODY...how Ilena treated the very women who is is
an 'international advocate' for.
>
> Does that complaint hold up considering:
>
> A. How Betty treats people
Who exactly are you referring to?
> B. Betty's connection with a POSSE whose
> entire purpose is to harass others?
We still have no proof of this supposed 'posse', or 'group' that you speak
of. Please clue me in. I'm dying to know who I am supposedly rubbing
elbows with today.
> C. Betty had no business other than
> harassment to even be in the breast
> implant survivors group in the first
> place.
I don't?
And how might you know that?
Are you privy to the thoughts of all the women? Or just a sampling of them?
Or, just Ilena?
I can tell you this, I most certainly have more of a place in the implant
group, considering my familial history, than you do, yet you are right there
doing the same thing that you are badgering me for.
I must say, regardless of who may or may not have whispered in your ear,
it's very apparent that the breast implanted women accept me as one of them
just as they accept their own children as part of the breast implant issue.
It looks like the only person who has a complaint about me posting to the BI
group is Ilena.
Just as Will said, if Ilena posts only informative and non controversial
posts, no one ever says anything to her.
The fighting starts when she decides that it's time for her to attack
someone for no good reason.
Maybe you should also take that into account.
>
Coleah
shower as punishment for 'messing herself' and he is preaching to you about
appropriateness? Chuckle, chuckle....
Perhaps if he really wants a clear education he needs to read the newsgroup
archives to see who started what and who smears who. My take is this Greg
person is just trying to yank your chain....cause he's fresh out of
children.
I think Ilena may feel a bit smug about California's SLAPP suit
protection....she hasn't been sued outside of the State of California, yet.
"dragonsgirl" <drago...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:qEhlg.52922$Lm5....@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
dragonsgirl
> Betty, this is the same Greg person who admitted he forced a kid into a
cold
> shower as punishment for 'messing herself' and he is preaching to you
about
> appropriateness? Chuckle, chuckle....
For true.
>
> Perhaps if he really wants a clear education he needs to read the
newsgroup
> archives to see who started what and who smears who. My take is this Greg
> person is just trying to yank your chain....cause he's fresh out of
> children.
Heh. Well, that may be the reason.
Could be more to it than that...I suspect Greg is prone to jump on the
bandwagon about moi because I DO CLEARLY SEE HIS SHOWERING ACTIVITIES AS
CHILD ABUSE...though I don't quite know just yet if I would call him a
sexual abuser...though the state of Iowa did.
>
> I think Ilena may feel a bit smug about California's SLAPP suit
> protection....she hasn't been sued outside of the State of California,
yet.
Sadly true.
A day comes for all of us.
I suspect her's won't be long coming now.
Hey! Maybe if Greg keeps talking HE can ALSO go down in history as part of
the 'SLAPP' campaign against Ilena Rosenthal???
Maybe it can be his claim to fame...
No, wait...he's already had his 15 mintues of infamy with his Ways and Means
letter.
LOL
Greegor
Betty wrote
>Heh. Well, that may be the reason.
>Could be more to it than that...I suspect Greg
> is prone to jump on the bandwagon about
> moi because I DO CLEARLY SEE HIS
> SHOWERING ACTIVITIES AS CHILD
> ABUSE...though I don't quite know just
> yet if I would call him a sexual abuser...
> though the state of Iowa did.
Not exactly, and to the extent they did they are eating those words.
And THIS is how you show you're an innocent victim
of attacks FROM ILENA?
Extending a lie while distancing yourself from it?
This style of attack also reinforces your complaint
about Ilena outing people's private information. (sic)
BreastImplantAwareness.org
>Betty's big complaint about Illena has been how Illena treated somebody.
Yes, on the newsgroup I created for women harmed by breast implants,
Betty has now taken on the 'voluntary' (she claims) position of
changing history and reposting the libel and lies of others and
attempting to make it look like I harassed Susan Schaezler and Patrick
O'leary, instead of the facts, that I defended myself from them.
Much of her webpage dedicated to me quotes out of context snippets of
a private email I sent to Susan Elaine Schaezler... who was in cahoots
with the President of the largest breast implant maker at the time,
Patrick O'leary. She refuses to give the context of quotes that I
never posted on the internet, nor the most important from the letter
that said, "I"VE TOLD YOU DOZENS AND DOZENS OF TIME ... LEAVE ME
ALONE."
Wirsen has expressed her admiration several times for Schaezler ...
and is now claiming to have the "facts" regarding telephone
conversations that happened years before she went on attack ... and is
regurgitating the 'viewpoint' of Myrl Jeffcoat (who wasn't a part of
the conversations) Susan Schaezler (who wasn't a part of the
conversations) ... and Patrick O'leary, who got busted for hiding
behind Schaezler and lying to the public for several years.
I'm going to put on my blog some facts about the phone conversations I
had with him ... where he was attempting to 'romance' me into being
his 'posting ho' (posting hostess, if you will) like Schaezler had
been for years.
He was fed up with her rampages against me, and wanted me to post the
industry propaganda for him ... I believe now it is Coleah Penley
Ayers and Betty Jean doing it for him. The industry wants people to
believe that the silicone breast implant issue is about "choice" ...
when in fact, it's all about safety.
Betty Jean discusses these conversations as if she were spying on the
lines ... yet her accounts are pure Jeffcoat and Schaezler.
Further, Wirsen has posted several whoppppppers regarding mine & Very
Teasdale aka Polevoy lawsuit now in the Supreme Court of California
... repeating what plaintiff Terry Polevoy wishes were true but isn't.
She clearly does not understand the case ... and is just being a
parrot for his side . His two co-plaintiffs lost utterly and
completely to me ... Stephen Barrett and Christopher Grell ... and now
Betty is giving their "unbiased" LOL viewpoints.
Details here:
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/SS.html
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/betty-wirsen.htm
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/myrl.html
BreastImplantAwareness.org
harassment to even be in the breast
implant survivors group in the first
place.
She claims her mother had implants and thus gives her the "right" to
outright libel me regarding a young girl whose family I helped in
Costa Rica ... and the rest of her Smear campaign.
I have received some info lately that makes several of us doubt her
changing story ...
Her style has changed entirely and she now sounds as if she is
channelling my losing plaintiff, Stephen Barrett.
In fact, implants or not ... Betty Jean is regurgitating the lies and
libel put out by the Rag-tag Posse of Snakeoil Vigilantes (I'm not
kidding ... that's what they call themselves)
BreastImplantAwareness.org
Wirsen totally projects how she would behave were she to help collect
money for a family ... "misuse funds" is what she lied I had done ...
Here are the facts:
www.CostaRicaTreasures.com/karina.htm
dragonsgirl
> Thank you Betty Jean Hammond Wirsen of Springfield MO
>
> Betty wrote
> >Heh. Well, that may be the reason.
> >Could be more to it than that...I suspect Greg
> > is prone to jump on the bandwagon about
> > moi because I DO CLEARLY SEE HIS
> > SHOWERING ACTIVITIES AS CHILD
> > ABUSE...though I don't quite know just
> > yet if I would call him a sexual abuser...
> > though the state of Iowa did.
>
> Not exactly, and to the extent they did they are eating those words.
So then it's safe to assume that Lisa Jr is back in the care and control of
her mother while DFS in Iowa is feasting on their words?
>
> And THIS is how you show you're an innocent victim
> of attacks FROM ILENA?
Was I trying to 'show' someone anything?
LOL
>
> Extending a lie while distancing yourself from it?
Exentding a lie, while distancing myself from it?
Isn't that what you were accused of, Greg?
Why, I don't know if it's a lie or not.
I suspect it is an UNTRUTH...but that's because I'm much more willing to
listen to the real meaning behind what others say...Yeah, I think you were
wrong for the shower business...but I'm not quite sure that Iowa got the
sexual abuse story right.
Since you pointed it out...ummmm...how come it bothers you that I say I
don't believe you are a sexual abuser?
>
> This style of attack also reinforces your complaint
> about Ilena outing people's private information. (sic)
I outed your private information?
But, didn't you tell us all on ASCPS that you were acccused of sexual abuse?
How did I 'out' that?
YOU were the one who told everyone here that, and long before I ever got to
this group, isn't that so?
I mean, really, anyone who looks at the archives can tell that for
themselves.
>
Will Ketcher
President of McGhan --- but has no problem with her own bathtub
conversations with him. Do we have a double standard here?
Mplnt May 28 2003, 3:56 pm hide options
Newsgroups: alt.support.breast-implant
From: m...@aol.com (Mplnt) - Find messages by this author
Date: 28 May 2003 22:55:18 GMT
Local: Wed, May 28 2003 3:55 pm
Subject: Re: Notification of payment recieved
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse
In article <19faaec.0305280505.68ad2...@posting.google.com>,
i...@san.rr.com
(Ilena) wrote:
<<
When you were unexpectedly served at 10am on a December weekday morn in
1999 ... our process server came back and commented to me that you
smelled like you had been on a long, long, binge
...>
I am sure that hearsay from one of your "friends" would make this a
fact. Unfortunately, you have never seen me take a drink, you no of no
instance where I got into any kind of trouble as the inebrated person
that you would like me to be, nor do you know of any time I was even
with someone who had a drink. Your sum knowledge of me in this regard
is ZERO.
It is really too bad that someone like rosie, who can stand on her own
merits, feels that the only way she can help the SBI women is to defame
people on the internet. What a waste, she actually could have helped
the women if she was not so engrossed in just herself.
>During our telephone conversations, drinking was definitely a topic of your conversation ... and don't you remember telling me how much better your Deutsch is when you've been drinking
...>><BR><BR>
All I remember was you telling me about how you used to screw people in
the park in Marian Island in Budapest. You were quite proud of this.
The other thing was you wanted me to come over and take a bath with
you. You were already in the bath and aske me to join you. Of course,
I did not. But what is really funny is your attacks on Myrl for
"flirting" as you call it, when in actuality she was complimenting my
wife, when you are asking me to take a bath with you. Can any one tell
me which is the most provocotive in this regard, rosie or myrl. I think
we know the answer - hands down.
M...@AOL.com
dragonsgirl
Ilena Bitches on the 'me, my, I' some more by saying:
> Yes, on the newsgroup I created for women harmed by breast implants,
> Betty has now taken on the 'voluntary' (she claims) position of
> changing history and reposting the libel and lies of others and
> attempting to make it look like I harassed Susan Schaezler and Patrick
> O'leary, instead of the facts, that I defended myself from them.
Ouch.
Now I don't know, Ilena Rosenthal, I just cannot understand why it is that
YOU cannot understand that YOU attacking anyone in the way you have is not
befitting someone who is a 'support leader'.
I just don't know why that won't seep into your fuzzy little head.
>
> Much of her webpage dedicated to me quotes out of context snippets of
> a private email I sent to Susan Elaine Schaezler
There are some things that, taken out of context, or completely in context,
are still malicious and absolutely uncalled for.
But...you did say them, no?
... who was in cahoots
> with the President of the largest breast implant maker at the time,
> Patrick O'leary.
While Ilena pisses and moans about Patrick Oleary and SS's relationship, if
any existed...she had a high time rubbing elbows with Nate Schachtman and
Im-ing with Mplant...oh yeah.
She refuses to give the context of quotes that I
> never posted on the internet, nor the most important from the letter
> that said, "I"VE TOLD YOU DOZENS AND DOZENS OF TIME ... LEAVE ME
> ALONE."
Ilena refuses to acknowledge that whether she said leave me alone a dozen
times or four trillion times, she COULD have clicked that little button that
blocks emails...like a real 'humanitarian' would...rather than let her
temper get the best of her and have to hear about it for seven or ten years.
>
> Wirsen has expressed her admiration several times for Schaezler ...
> and is now claiming to have the "facts" regarding telephone
> conversations that happened years before she went on attack ... and is
> regurgitating the 'viewpoint' of Myrl Jeffcoat (who wasn't a part of
> the conversations) Susan Schaezler (who wasn't a part of the
> conversations) ... and Patrick O'leary, who got busted for hiding
> behind Schaezler and lying to the public for several years.
Telephone conversations???
LOL
I didn't know anything about any telephone conversations...it was you who
posted them, and I believed them to be IM's...are you now telling me that
you posted your transcripts of conversations with Mplant and that you
actually ADMITTED that you talked to this guy as if you were old long time
friends?????
>
> I'm going to put on my blog some facts about the phone conversations I
> had with him ... where he was attempting to 'romance' me into being
> his 'posting ho' (posting hostess, if you will) like Schaezler had
> been for years.
One question peaches...what were YOU doing on the phone with him in the
first place??? That seems to be a very pertinent question to ask a woman
who has hounded the hell out of others who have had contact with 'the other
side'.
>
> He was fed up with her rampages against me, and wanted me to post the
> industry propaganda for him ... I believe now it is Coleah Penley
> Ayers and Betty Jean doing it for him.
LOL
Yeah.
Me, years ago.
LOL
The industry wants people to
> believe that the silicone breast implant issue is about "choice" ...
> when in fact, it's all about safety.
No shit?
>
> Betty Jean discusses these conversations as if she were spying on the
> lines ... yet her accounts are pure Jeffcoat and Schaezler.
No, sorry, your posts.
>
> Further, Wirsen has posted several whoppppppers regarding mine & Very
> Teasdale aka Polevoy lawsuit now in the Supreme Court of California
> ... repeating what plaintiff Terry Polevoy wishes were true but isn't.
> She clearly does not understand the case ... and is just being a
> parrot for his side . His two co-plaintiffs lost utterly and
> completely to me ... Stephen Barrett and Christopher Grell ... and now
> Betty is giving their "unbiased" LOL viewpoints.
Quack quack quack.
Now, let me see...I am so simple minded that I can't understand that you
were sued for reposting something that someone else said that was libelous
when you weren't the author of the libelous statement...just the repeater.
Isn't that what happened?
And you beat him.
No?
I think I have it right, don't I?
But then in the case of Terry Polevoy you supposedly AUTHORED some libelous
statements, and so that one you didn't wiggle out of as easily.
Ok, I believe that is my understanding of things...please correct me if I'm
wrong.
Regardless, Ilena, your web site promotes what is YOUR opinion, no?
And mine promotes MY opinion.
It's called free speech...it's where people present their viewpoints and
others can either like it or live with it.
I can guarantee that MUCH of what you have said about myself, my mother, my
family, etc is untrue and MUCH contrived...however, you have a right to say
anything you like about me so long as it's just your opinion...which counts
for absolutely ZERO.
And I have the same right, and my opinion of what I have read about your
'history' as an advocate counts for just as much.
Ahhhhhhhh.
Rights are a WONDERFUL thing!
More details here:
www.bettywirsen.com/ilena%20rosenthal.htm
dragonsgirl
> C. Betty had no business other than
> harassment to even be in the breast
> implant survivors group in the first
> place.
>
> She claims her mother had implants and thus gives her the "right" to
> outright libel me regarding a young girl whose family I helped in
> Costa Rica ... and the rest of her Smear campaign.
I asked questions, gave my opinion...I stated that I found much of the info
odd.
I didn't know that was libel.
I thought it was simply my opinion.
>
> I have received some info lately that makes several of us doubt her
> changing story ...
You just doubt away peaches, but you just remember, it may be true, it may
not...who knows what might get sent to you...or what you might contrive on
your own and blame on others?
>
> Her style has changed entirely and she now sounds as if she is
> channelling my losing plaintiff, Stephen Barrett.
I'm not a psychic, I dont' believe that Barrett is dead and I could
'channel' him anyway.
>
> In fact, implants or not ... Betty Jean is regurgitating the lies and
> libel put out by the Rag-tag Posse of Snakeoil Vigilantes (I'm not
> kidding ... that's what they call themselves)
Indeed! That IS what they call themselves!
And I'm not one of them.
www.bettywirsen.com/ilena%20rosenthal.htm
BreastImplantAwareness.org
>And I'm not one of them.
Call yourself whatever you want ... you are reposting their libel, and
posting ridiculous legal opinions that come from my losing plaintiffs,
and Coleah's favorite crossdressing troll, Terry "Vera Teasdale"
Polevoy.
Further, you are either channelling Myrl Jeffcoat and Stephen Barrett
and Willa Nidiffer (Nanaweedkiller) or just reposting their identical
lies about many,many, many circumstances which they were NOT a party
to ... including libelous accusations.
It appears that you have no accurate knowledge about libel and are
getting your legal advice via disbarred attorney, Mark S Probert
and/or Stephen Barrett, one of my losing, sue happy plaintiffs,
Stephen Barrett.
BTW ... one of their tactics is no matter how much they are outed and
busted, they always deny their guilt.
Probert has done this for years ... and now more so with your help.
BreastImplantAwareness.org
One thing that was very sad for me in reading all the longwinded
sexual and drug accusations about members of her family ... living and
dead was this ...
Did she receive her daughter's permission to publicly post about her
sexual encounters and parenting skills?
What about her sister (half sister, it appears)? Did she give Betty
Wirsen permission to broadcast her life according to Betty??????
Or the father of her grandchild ?
This woman says she "doesn't want publicity" and then in the 'privacy'
of a worldwide open newsgroup, talks about her "sexual abuse."
I KNOW 10000% that many things Betty posts about me as "facts" are
pure fabrications from people who fought me in court.
dragonsgirl
>
> Wirsen totally projects how she would behave were she to help collect
> money for a family ... "misuse funds" is what she lied I had done ...
Naw.
I don't have to steal from people less fortunate than I am.
Never have, and never will.
Don't care much for money, in itself.
It's nice when you have it...no big deal when you don't.
I've had it both ways.
I don't bitch about how broke I am.
I don't blame breast implanted women for me being broke.
How about you?
dragonsgirl
> Betty Jean Hammond Wirsen claims:
>
> >And I'm not one of them.
>
> Call yourself whatever you want ... you are reposting their libel, and
> posting ridiculous legal opinions that come from my losing plaintiffs,
> and Coleah's favorite crossdressing troll, Terry "Vera Teasdale"
> Polevoy.
So, um, does that mean when you post hate and contempt that makes you a
bitch, no matter what you call yourself?
>
> Further, you are either channelling Myrl Jeffcoat and Stephen Barrett
> and Willa Nidiffer (Nanaweedkiller) or just reposting their identical
> lies about many,many, many circumstances which they were NOT a party
> to ... including libelous accusations.
Wellllllllllllll, I guess the law allows for that since I am just
'reposting' and not actually the original author and am just expressing my
opinion.
BTW...thanks for defending my right to speak my mind!
>
> It appears that you have no accurate knowledge about libel and are
> getting your legal advice via disbarred attorney, Mark S Probert
> and/or Stephen Barrett, one of my losing, sue happy plaintiffs,
> Stephen Barrett.
I bet you'd shit your pants if you knew who Mark Probert really is.
Oh yeah!
LOL
>
> BTW ... one of their tactics is no matter how much they are outed and
> busted, they always deny their guilt.
Well now, guilt is one of those subjective things, isn't it?
BTW, where did you obtain your JD?
>
> Probert has done this for years ... and now more so with your help.
I think he apologized.
Of course, that's not good enough for you, is it?
www.bettywirsen.com/ilena%20rosenthal.htm
Will Ketcher
others --- let's explore what the archives reveal in sordid history
about Ilena Rosenthal, and her fellow associates and mentors---
What is Humantics Foundation?
Ilena Mirowitz Rosenthal (Rose) Lord claims that Humantics Foundation
is 41 years old. In so doing, she is morphing the truth right along
with the very Foundation itself.
Dr. Anthony Zaffuto began a non-profit with the name of Calvary Boys
Ranch, which later became Teens N Trouble. After some years of being
dormant, and after Ilena Rosenthal began having questions asked of her
regarding her status for taking in contributions, that old non-profit
was resurrected into Humantics Foundation.
Humantics Foundation CEO, is Dr. Anthony Zaffuto. In addition to
creating non-profits (Calvary Boys Ranch/Teens N Trouble),Dr. Zaffuto
also has a penchant for authoring books and videos with such titles as:
"Solo Male Ecstasy," and/or "The Complete Guide to Oral Lovemaking."
Ilena Rosenthal describes Dr. Zaffuto as her "Mentor" and business
partner.
Ilena Mirowitz Rosenthal (Rose) Lord is the Director of Humantics
Foundation. She has a resume that consists of: Dating services; bar
maid; Pepper Spray salesperson; counterfit bill detector salesperson;
timeshare slammer.
The Humantics Foundation "physical" address consists of a few square
inches confined to a mailbox within a UPS Store. Humantics Director
(Ilena Rosenthal) claims to be living in Costa Rica. The Humantics
Foundation phone is a voice mail service that provides a recording that
Humantics Foundation can no longer provide "free" services.
Ilena Mirowitz Rosenthal (Rose) Lord continues to slander, and attempt
to discredit the NSIF, BIS, and WIS organizations, as well as numerous
other legitimate breast implant support people, and victims. She
abuses, berates, disrupts, divides, and distracts.
It is also important to note that Ilena Mirowitz Rosenthal (Rose) Lord
has never had breast implants, nor has she had breast cancer.
The address of the Humantics Foundation is evidenced in the picture
below. It consists of a few square inches within a mailbox at a UPS
Store in San Diego. The Director (Ilena Mirowitz Rosenthal [Rose]
Lord], claims to reside in Costa Rica. Ilena's resume' consists of
Dating services; bar maid; Pepper Spray salesperson; counterfit bill
detector salesperson; timeshare slammer; business partner of Anthony
Zaffuto
http://www.onlinerummaging.com/asbi/10.jpg
Money from the Humantics Foundation was used to pay attorney's fees for
Ilena Rosenthal's lawsuits.
Message-ID: <ilena-16070...@24-25-201-231.san.rr.com>
Message-ID: <ilena-17070...@24-25-201-231.san.rr.com>
The director of the Humantics Foundation, Ilena Rosenthal, has emailed
family members of posters to try to stifle their complaints against her
actions.
Ilena Rosenthal has called newsgroup posters' homes to communicate with
family members in an effort to stifle their online postings.
Ilena Rosenthal has emailed and called posters' employers:
dragonsgirl
>
> One thing that was very sad for me in reading all the longwinded
> sexual and drug accusations about members of her family ... living and
> dead was this ...
>
> Did she receive her daughter's permission to publicly post about her
> sexual encounters and parenting skills?
>
>
> What about her sister (half sister, it appears)? Did she give Betty
> Wirsen permission to broadcast her life according to Betty??????
>
> Or the father of her grandchild ?
LOL
YOU, of ALL people, have a conscience SUDDENLY, about posting information
about OTHERS?
LOL
That is amusing...and while I refrain from using names for ANYONE that I
talk about, YOU have never had one little inkling of regret about doing just
that...and not only using their names, but their addresses, etc as well.
Just as I said, there are two sets of rules in your world....YOURS, and the
ones you expect everyone else to live by.
>
> This woman says she "doesn't want publicity" and then in the 'privacy'
> of a worldwide open newsgroup, talks about her "sexual abuse."
There is a large difference between 'publicity' and talking about my life
experiences candidly in hopes that others will not make the same mistakes I
have in the past.
And yes, Ilena, I'm sure it just tickles the pink to your cheeks to know
that I come from a dysfunctional family...but it's neither against the law,
nor immoral.
I've seen many a person say thing to you about your own father.
Yet you do not see me say the same things.
Do you know why that is?
I know that you cannot help what your father has or has not done...no more
than I could help what my family has done.
I only hold you accountable for YOUR actions, not the actions of others.
I guess you didn't realize that when you decided that you would like to talk
smack about my relatives.
I say you should be so so proud of yourself.
Even people who have a sense of understanding for you get hit as low as you
know how.
It's easy to see why you are so loved.
>
>
> I KNOW 10000% that many things Betty posts about me as "facts" are
> pure fabrications from people who fought me in court.
And I know that many of the things you say about me and mine are 10000%
false. Yet you do not listen, you do not change them or remove them...you
make up what you will as you go along it seems.
And I know that many of the things that you have said about others is untrue
as well. LOTS of it.
But still, you do not listen, and you continue to go on and on about others
as if you had a key to thier lives right in your hands.
I can think of four accusations you have made, right off the top of my head,
that are so utterly rediculously false that it's not even funny...and some
of them you have been saying for YEARS after being told time and time again
that what you are saying is untrue. But you still beat it like a dead
horse.
Think what you like Ilena, as I said before, I have my right to my opinion,
and I have expressed it fairly and reasonably.
I'm sorry if you don't like it, but YOU fought for my right in the
California Supreme Court to do so. And again, I thank you for that.
www.bettywirsen.com/ilena%20rosenthal.htm
dragonsgirl
Taken completely IN context, without a 'snippet' to it...appears that Ilena
contacted Dr so-and-so, to talk to Dr-so-and-so about her.
Now I dunno, I'm no expert...but it looks to me like Ilena, completely IN
context, with her own words, seems to be thanking one doctor for getting on
the be-hind of another on her behalf.
Was Dr A the employer of Dr B?
>
BreastImplantAwareness.org
you are fooling only the other fools and shills.
Your penchant for attempting to change the history of what happened on
the newsgroup based on the desired happenings of those who battle and
battled me in court ... is laughable.
I would never know Susan Schaezler or YOU, for that matter, had you
both not made the destruction of my reputation your "business" ...
volunteer or compensated.
Your mentor Susan Schaezler years ago harassed the State of California
and the IRS about our tiny foundation ... with Patrick O'leary hiding
his identity guiding her ... much the same as the SBIPrivateClub which
you deny exists.
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/SBIPrivateClub.htm
You have written about Carol Mancini of Silicone Scene ... someone
you never knew and know nothing about. Well, Pat the Plant O'leary
began his interrogations of me asking why we were incorporated. He was
then VP of McGhan in Santa Barbara ... denying his identity with Susan
Schaelzer ... under oath, lying to all the women in her group and
tossing off those who questioned him ... asking me about the previous
San Diego Support Group Leader's foundation. Why? That's the way
industry operates ... they attack and try to discredit or find some
way to destroy from within .... interrogate, interrogate, interrogate.
Are you unable to understand the article PR War Against Activists????
www.BreastImplantAwareness.og/DisinfoAgents.htm#articles
How Andrew M Langer and Mark S Probert operate to infiltrate is
outlined there ... both of them ass to ass with Stephen Barrett and
Terry Polevoy in the Rag-tag Posse which you claim no alliance with
... although you post verbatim their beliefs, libel and other lies
about me.
Susan Schaezler, after finding out my maiden name, began posting
research on various family members of mine ... living and dead ...
some accurate some not.
She posted the name and address of my foundation directors and lied to
the public that one of them had stolen money from her. She harassed
this same woman by phone and email telling her the lie that the
Attorney General of Utah was going to arrest her. This woman whose
address she posted had a young daughter at the time ... and became
terrified of Susan Schaezler's actions.
This is your poor "victim" ... the one who spent days and days and
days filling my email box with her huge jpgs ... so none of the many
women who were trying to get to me could reach me.
She refused to leave me alone publicly until about a year ago ... and
when she did, several of her aliases stopped at the identical moment.
Those are facts ... not the nonsense you've been following me
throughout the internet posting.
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/SS.html
As far as you posting the sexual and drug history of several of your
relatives ... that is, according to Betty Jean Hammond Wirsen ...
you, the mother, half-sister, daughter and stepdaughter, grandmother
... airing THEIR secrets publicly ...
As someone commented to me today, Witch Wirsen ... you give Witches a
very bad name.
Greegor
> While Ilena Rosenthal tries to 'paint' certain 'sordid' details onto
> others --- let's explore what the archives reveal in sordid history
> about Ilena Rosenthal, and her fellow associates and mentors---
>
> What is Humantics Foundation?
>
> Ilena Mirowitz Rosenthal (Rose) Lord claims that Humantics Foundation
> is 41 years old. In so doing, she is morphing the truth right along
> with the very Foundation itself.
>
> Dr. Anthony Zaffuto began a non-profit with the name of Calvary Boys
> Ranch, which later became Teens N Trouble. After some years of being
> dormant, and after Ilena Rosenthal began having questions asked of her
> regarding her status for taking in contributions, that old non-profit
> was resurrected into Humantics Foundation.
Is there something criminal or dishonest there?
They complied with the IRS, correct?
> Humantics Foundation CEO, is Dr. Anthony Zaffuto. In addition to
> creating non-profits (Calvary Boys Ranch/Teens N Trouble),Dr. Zaffuto
> also has a penchant for authoring books and videos with such titles as:
> "Solo Male Ecstasy," and/or "The Complete Guide to Oral Lovemaking."
> Ilena Rosenthal describes Dr. Zaffuto as her "Mentor" and business
> partner.
Even if true, SO WHAT?
Are you showing how this is not a smear campaign?
I think it backfired.
> Ilena Mirowitz Rosenthal (Rose) Lord is the Director of Humantics
> Foundation. She has a resume that consists of: Dating services; bar
> maid; Pepper Spray salesperson; counterfit bill detector salesperson;
> timeshare slammer.
Again, smear tactics...
> The Humantics Foundation "physical" address consists of a few square
> inches confined to a mailbox within a UPS Store.
If you check out various non profit organizations you will
find LOTS of smaller ones with similar physical addresses.
In context here this might be evidence of stalking behavior.
> Humantics Director (Ilena Rosenthal) claims to be living in Costa Rica.
> The Humantics Foundation phone is a voice mail service that
> provides a recording that Humantics Foundation can no longer
> provide "free" services.
What's your official occupation and work address Will Ketchum?
Please post it here publicly, then complain about people
who are smart enough to follow internet security suggestions.
> Ilena Mirowitz Rosenthal (Rose) Lord continues to slander, and attempt
> to discredit the
NSIF,
BIS, and
WIS
> organizations, as well as numerous other legitimate breast
> implant support people, and victims. She
> abuses, berates, disrupts, divides, and distracts.
As opposed to what? The Posse?
> It is also important to note that Ilena Mirowitz Rosenthal (Rose) Lord
> has never had breast implants, nor has she had breast cancer.
She found out before getting some? How's that bad?
<repeated text snipped>
> http://www.onlinerummaging.com/asbi/10.jpg
Let the record show that the photoshopped (edited)
picture is of a mailbox contractor with Ilena
edited in front of it, and cartoony depictions of
a big bunch of money in front of her.
Clearly the intent is to appeal to baser jealousy.
> Money from the Humantics Foundation was used to
> pay attorney's fees for Ilena Rosenthal's lawsuits.
Is this illegal or inapppropriate?
After that, the foundation has a pile of money?
Ilena must have done something right!
> Message-ID: <ilena-16070...@24-25-201-231.san.rr.com>
> Message-ID: <ilena-17070...@24-25-201-231.san.rr.com>
>
> The director of the Humantics Foundation, Ilena Rosenthal, has emailed
> family members of posters to try to stifle their complaints against her
> actions.
Was this beyond seeking peaceful redress of grievances?
Was anything illegal done?
> Ilena Rosenthal has called newsgroup posters' homes
> to communicate with family members in an effort to
> stifle their online postings.
Did you ever ask her not to?
> Ilena Rosenthal has emailed and called posters' employers:
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?q=jbrownli%40rvc.ac.uk&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&c2coff=1&safe=off&selm=ilena-1605021134560001%40dt011n65.san.rr.com&rnum=1
I thought you said that Ilena STARTED the hostile comments.
Clearly this is not a first strike.
Coleah
>> Greegor stated:
> >Betty's big complaint about Illena has been how Illena treated somebody.
No, not just 'somebody' sweet cheeks....LOTS and
lots of somebody's. Read the archives.
> Yes, on the newsgroup I created for women harmed by breast implants,
> Betty has now taken on the 'voluntary' (she claims) position of
> changing history and reposting the libel and lies of others and
> attempting to make it look like I harassed Susan Schaezler and Patrick
> O'leary, instead of the facts, that I defended myself from them.
> Much of her webpage dedicated to me quotes out of context snippets of
> a private email I sent to Susan Elaine Schaezler... who was in cahoots
> with the President of the largest breast implant maker at the time,
> Patrick O'leary. She refuses to give the context of quotes that I
> never posted on the internet, nor the most important from the letter
> that said, "I"VE TOLD YOU DOZENS AND DOZENS OF TIME ... LEAVE ME
> ALONE."
Ah yes, like writing a private email to tell someone to leave you alone
justifys all your actual 'snippet' statements. Somebody get me a
towel....I'm going to weep!
> Wirsen has expressed her admiration several times for Schaezler ...
As has the groups of Christian breast implant women who have stayed at her
home throughout the years for breast implant support retreats.
> and is now claiming to have the "facts" regarding telephone
> conversations that happened years before she went on attack ... and is
> regurgitating the 'viewpoint' of Myrl Jeffcoat (who wasn't a part of
> the conversations) Susan Schaezler (who wasn't a part of the
> conversations) ... and Patrick O'leary, who got busted for hiding
> behind Schaezler and lying to the public for several years.
>
> I'm going to put on my blog some facts about the phone conversations I
> had with him ... where he was attempting to 'romance' me into being
> his 'posting ho' (posting hostess, if you will) like Schaezler had
> been for years.
My, my, my ....
by day the archived newsgroup posts reflect how Ilena claimed she was being
viciously 'attacked' by some evil man who confronted her about the
scientific information she posted and couldn't hold an intelligent
conversation about. Why, Ilena was apparently SOoooo bothered and abused
by this evil man that by night she sat watching the AOL instant messenger so
she could pounce and initiate private conversations with him. Rather like
a....what?.......that's right boys and girls....a stalking cat. Those
instant messenger conversations BTW were then copied verbatium and shared
with Ilena's 'grouplet' of breast implant flunkies....ha, ha, ha. Like me
and several others who started questioning 'intent'.
Talking about things of a sexual nature, mentioning her breasts, giving
excuses why she looked 'frumpy' (because it's not right to look hot and sexy
around those 'messed up' breast implant women), inviting him to telephone
while she bathed.....oh yes, the world can see just how horribly harassed
and attacked Ilena really felt from this bad guy....and how she just wanted
him to "LEAVE ME ALONE"....poor, poor abused Ilena......and then she sued
him, Inamed and AOL for $100 million dollars, just a short time later.
Paints a pretty picture, doesn't it?
> He was fed up with her rampages against me, and wanted me to post the
> industry propaganda for him ... I believe now it is Coleah Penley
> Ayers and Betty Jean doing it for him. The industry wants people to
> believe that the silicone breast implant issue is about "choice" ...
> when in fact, it's all about safety.
Believe? Believe, your hairy ass !!
Let's see all this 'industry propaganda' you are so 'believingly' suggesting
that I am 'posting FOR him'. Would that 'I believe' be like when Chuck
'believed' you were turning tricks at the San Diego Naval station?
The bottom line here about 'choice' actually has nothing to do with the
breast implant industry. If a product (pick a product....any product) is
'approved' as safe by the FDA (whether we may like it or not), then people
have a free-will-choice to either use it or not. Some of 'us' who were so
'messed up' from having had breast implants have actually participated in
communicating with the FDA urging them NOT to approve breast implants. Yes,
women like me. Of course you Ilena (not ever having had breast implants
yourself) wouldn't have a first-hand vested interest in the matter. But do
carry on with spreading your paranoid 'beliefs'....if you haven't noticed,
people who matter are sick to death of hearing your tripe.
BTW - even if the FDA approves silicone breast implants as safe someday, I
think Ilena would still not want women to have a 'choice' (because she would
not believe their safety).....I believe she'd stand outside of plastic
surgeon offices to protest and confront all patients going in. Or maybe
she'd just send in all those 'thousands and thousands' of women claimed to
be on her support group. Naw, those women ironically never even show up for
rallys or to testify.....I believe perhaps those numbers are a tad
bit.....ah, exaggerated, don't you?)
> Betty Jean discusses these conversations as if she were spying on the
> lines ... yet her accounts are pure Jeffcoat and Schaezler.
>
> Further, Wirsen has posted several whoppppppers regarding mine & Very
> Teasdale aka Polevoy lawsuit now in the Supreme Court of California
> ... repeating what plaintiff Terry Polevoy wishes were true but isn't.
Your attributes to 'several whopppppppers' ?
Your sweeping and grandious generalization is not conveniencing the peanut
gallery.....
Ho hum.
BreastImplantAwareness.org
Crap and more crap.
Like Wirsen and Mark Probert ... she is posting nonsense that mirrors
the wacked out crossdressing plaintiff in the case ... Terry "Vera
Teasdale" Polevoy desires and beliefs.
Believe nothing this woman says ... or she'll have you believing I was
making commissions of a "vibrating vagina" she purchased on the
internet.
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/coleah.htm
dragonsgirl
> Whatever your perverted beliefs are ... Betty Jean Hammond Wirsen ...
> you are fooling only the other fools and shills.
Oh brother.
>
>
> Your penchant for attempting to change the history of what happened on
> the newsgroup based on the desired happenings of those who battle and
> battled me in court ... is laughable.
>
> I would never know Susan Schaezler or YOU, for that matter, had you
> both not made the destruction of my reputation your "business" ...
> volunteer or compensated.
Ilena, I can't speak for Susan S, but the truth of the matter is that your
reputation was shot before I ever even knew you existed.
>
> Your mentor
You toss that word around a lot. Obiously you have no idea what it means.
Susan Schaezler years ago harassed the State of California
> and the IRS about our tiny foundation
You say it's a foundation with THOUSANDS of supporters...what is it? Tiny
or HUGE?
Make up your mind for God's sake.
... with Patrick O'leary hiding
> his identity guiding her ... much the same as the SBIPrivateClub which
> you deny exists.
I never denied it's existence.
Again, you misquote me...I said that I never posted there to my knowledge as
YOU claim I have, and I have never SEEN SBIPrivateClub.
I didn't say it didn't exist.
>
> www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/SBIPrivateClub.htm
>
>
> You have written about Carol Mancini of Silicone Scene ... someone
> you never knew and know nothing about.
I wrote 'Carole Mancini, founded Silicone Scene' Nothing more, nothing
less.
Is this information incorrect?
Well, Pat the Plant O'leary
> began his interrogations of me asking why we were incorporated. He was
> then VP of McGhan in Santa Barbara ... denying his identity with Susan
> Schaelzer ... under oath, lying to all the women in her group and
> tossing off those who questioned him ... asking me about the previous
> San Diego Support Group Leader's foundation. Why? That's the way
> industry operates ... they attack and try to discredit or find some
> way to destroy from within .... interrogate, interrogate, interrogate.
> Are you unable to understand the article PR War Against Activists????
Hokay...and this has what to do with Carol Mancini?
You bounce around from one thing to another so that I can't even follow you
half the time. You start the paragraph talking about Carol
Mancini...apparently bitching that I credit her with forming Silicone Scene,
and then say that she's from Silicone Scene, just as I said. What's the
deal?
>
> www.BreastImplantAwareness.og/DisinfoAgents.htm#articles
>
> How Andrew M Langer and Mark S Probert operate to infiltrate is
> outlined there ... both of them ass to ass with Stephen Barrett and
> Terry Polevoy in the Rag-tag Posse which you claim no alliance with
> ... although you post verbatim their beliefs, libel and other lies
> about me.
No, Ilena, I don't know anything about who any of those people are 'ass to
ass' with because I simply don't have the association with them that you
have claimed I do over and over and over and over and over again, time and
time again, relentlessly for the last year or whatever.
>
> Susan Schaezler, after finding out my maiden name, began posting
> research on various family members of mine ... living and dead ...
> some accurate some not.
Again, this excuses your behavior how?
>
> She posted the name and address of my foundation directors and lied to
> the public that one of them had stolen money from her. She harassed
> this same woman by phone and email telling her the lie that the
> Attorney General of Utah was going to arrest her. This woman whose
> address she posted had a young daughter at the time ... and became
> terrified of Susan Schaezler's actions.
And that excuses your behavior, again, HOW?
>
> This is your poor "victim" ... the one who spent days and days and
> days filling my email box with her huge jpgs ... so none of the many
> women who were trying to get to me could reach me.
And that was cause to tell the woman that you wished her dead or accuse her
of stealing your car, not once, but TWO times????
Hey, it's obvious you have a problem with me, and I with you...but if I went
outside tomorrow and my car was gone I would never think in a million years
that you did it.
I just don't get that.
>
> She refused to leave me alone publicly until about a year ago ... and
> when she did, several of her aliases stopped at the identical moment.
Are you sure that was her?
As sure as you were that Will Ketcher is Mark Probert?
As sure as you were that Martha Mudock was comitting fraud?
As sure as you are of ALL your statements???
>
> Those are facts ... not the nonsense you've been following me
> throughout the internet posting.
Ilena, I don't 'follow' you.
I post replies to the groups YOU have added to YOUR posts.
I do not read any groups other than SBI, MHA, and ASCPS.
YOU are the one who posts 'all over the internet'.
>
> www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/SS.html
>
> As far as you posting the sexual and drug history of several of your
> relatives ... that is, according to Betty Jean Hammond Wirsen ...
> you, the mother, half-sister, daughter and stepdaughter, grandmother
> ... airing THEIR secrets publicly ...
So? It's MY history to tell.
And, quite frankly, Ilena, I believe that honesty is the best policy.
I've spent many years working through the problems in my family and have
come to the realization that I can not help what they do...no more than I
can change what I have done in the past myself.
My 'wild' days are over. And they have been for a long long time.
Some of my family continues, yet cannot understand why they are not allowed
to raise children by the state, or why I refuse to allow them in my own
life.
I have every right to feel about them that I do...I've suffered a great deal
of abuse, humiliation, financial hardship, etc from my family.
I feel that I have a right to talk about it, and talk about how I have dealt
with it.
You want to talk about it?
Ask me anything you like, I will answer you just as honestly as I have
talked about those issues in the child protective group.
You see, Ilena, what you don't realize is that I have done so to PREVENT
others from making the same mistakes.
I have not hidden anything.
I do NOT want to see someone else raise a child with the same life that I
had.
I do NOT want to see a family who is making mistakes lose their children
forever when that could be prevented.
I don't want to see another family fall victim to drugs, alcohol, teen
pregnancy, etc as mine has.
My 'airing', as you call it, was done with extremely good intentions.
And it is my right to do so.
Whether YOU like it or not.
>
> As someone commented to me today, Witch Wirsen ... you give Witches a
> very bad name.
I don't really care what someone said to you...it makes no difference to me.
I have done alot to help families in the same boat as mine once was to
straighten out their lives.
I don't want anything from anyone but to help others understand that they
don't NEED Ritalin and drugs like it, they can raise their kids without
drugging them.
I want people to realize that they don't HAVE to spank their kids to get
them to behave...that they don't HAVE to resort to drug and alcohol abuse to
deal with their problems, that they don't HAVE to abuse their kids, that
THERE ARE better ways of living, and that being responsible feels GOOD!
If you have a problem with that, that is YOUR problem, NOT mine.
If someone else also has that same problem that is, likewise, THIER problem,
not mine.
For me and mine, I do as I see fit.
It seems that you think that I have a problem with you because of Stephen
Barrett...because of anyone or anything OTHER than the breast implanted
women that you have written pages on.
I do not.
I could not care less what you say about Stephen Barrett, Terry Polevoy,
Christopher Grell, or anyone other than the breast implant women.
To me, those women represent my mother.
If she were alive today she could have been on your shit list too. As a
matter of fact, I'm CERTAIN she would have been.
Any time you want to discuss how we can come to a mutual agreement about
this issue you are more than welcome to write to me personally.
Or don't.
I don't really care, but as I said before, I have a right to my opinion, and
a right to express it regardless of what you think of it.
>
>
Coleah
>
> One thing that was very sad for me in reading all the longwinded
> sexual and drug accusations about members of her family ... living and
> dead was this ...
>
> Did she receive her daughter's permission to publicly post about her
> sexual encounters and parenting skills?
>
>
> What about her sister (half sister, it appears)? Did she give Betty
> Wirsen permission to broadcast her life according to Betty??????
>
> Or the father of her grandchild ?
>
> This woman says she "doesn't want publicity" and then in the 'privacy'
> of a worldwide open newsgroup, talks about her "sexual abuse."
What shit did you wish to stir?
Or are you just diverting attention?
Bottom line: It's none of your 'effing business.
> I KNOW 10000% that many things Betty posts about me as "facts" are
> pure fabrications from people who fought me in court.
Be specific or shut the hell up.....
Coleah
> C. Betty had no business other than
> harassment to even be in the breast
> implant survivors group in the first
> place.
>
> She claims her mother had implants
Some breast implant support advocate you are!
> and thus gives her the "right" to
> outright libel me regarding a young girl whose family I helped in
> Costa Rica ... and the rest of her Smear campaign.
Please post where Betty ever said that 'gives her the right'.....I believe
you are spreading bullshit...again.
> I have received some info lately that makes several of us doubt her
> changing story ...
More paranoid secret information and boogie man theories?
Who gives a rats ass who 'doubts' her? Her mother had a breast implant, got
a settlement and passed away. I'm sure Betty could point you to the place
to send off for the official death certificate is it wads your panties that
much......
> Her style has changed entirely and she now sounds as if she is
> channelling my losing plaintiff, Stephen Barrett.
Does this mean that Ilena thinks Betty is really Stephen Barrett now? Too
funny.
> In fact, implants or not ... Betty Jean is regurgitating the lies and
> libel put out by the Rag-tag Posse of Snakeoil Vigilantes (I'm not
> kidding ... that's what they call themselves)
And now that you have plainly stated this
as an absolute 'fact'
I think you are just 'regurgitating'...everything in general.
Will Ketcher
> And now that you have plainly stated this
> as an absolute 'fact'
> I think you are just 'regurgitating'...everything in general.
I think you are right Ms. Coleah --- Ms. Ilena is 'regurgitating'
everything in general. It's her version of Acid Reflux disease.
Coleah
>
> "BreastImplantAwareness.org" <B...@mundo.com> wrote in message
> news:vkub9216mojv96vs6...@4ax.com...
> > Whatever your perverted beliefs are ... Betty Jean Hammond Wirsen ...
> > you are fooling only the other fools and shills.
> Oh brother.
> > Your penchant for attempting to change the history of what happened on
> > the newsgroup based on the desired happenings of those who battle and
> > battled me in court ... is laughable.
> >
> > I would never know Susan Schaezler or YOU, for that matter, had you
> > both not made the destruction of my reputation your "business" ...
> > volunteer or compensated.
> Ilena, I can't speak for Susan S, but the truth of the matter is that your
> reputation was shot before I ever even knew you existed.
> > Your mentor
>
> You toss that word around a lot. Obiously you have no idea what it means.
Well, funny you should mention that.
Ilena announced that Rosa Parks was her mentor, but she'd never even met
her. Yes, someone point out to her then that she had no idea what it meant.
> Susan Schaezler years ago harassed the State of California
> > and the IRS about our tiny foundation
> You say it's a foundation with THOUSANDS of supporters...what is it? Tiny
> or HUGE?
>
> Make up your mind for God's sake.
Oh my, you're asking her for accountability with her conflicting stories?
She'll slap you up a shit-list page for that.....oh....never mind, you
already got one. She'll update it now with rants about being harrassed
about the size of the foundation and the number of reported 'supporters'. I
believe with the last IRS filed form the total new members reported by the
foundation over the years exceeded 11,000. Pity that Ilena couldn't even
motivate 1% to show up for rallys and testimony.
> > ... with Patrick O'leary hiding
> > his identity guiding her ... much the same as the SBIPrivateClub which
> > you deny exists.
> I never denied it's existence.
> Again, you misquote me...I said that I never posted there to my knowledge
as
> YOU claim I have, and I have never SEEN SBIPrivateClub.
> I didn't say it didn't exist.
Hell, you can't tell Ilena anything.
She claimed as an absolute fact that "I" started the SBIPrivateClub.
Liar, liar Ilena.
> > Well, Pat the Plant O'leary
> > began his interrogations of me asking why we were incorporated. He was
> > then VP of McGhan in Santa Barbara ... denying his identity with Susan
> > Schaelzer ... under oath,
Interrogations? Ilena has never gotten that non-profits are open to public
inspection. I believe she has thought of the foundation as her own private
little business that is no ones business.
Denying his identity with Susan ?????
Under 'oath' ????????? Where?????
Good Lord, Ilena's flying at Drama Queen speed again.
> You bounce around from one thing to another so that I can't even follow
you
> half the time. You start the paragraph talking about Carol
> Mancini...apparently bitching that I credit her with forming Silicone
Scene,
> and then say that she's from Silicone Scene, just as I said. What's the
> deal?
Um....wackie-weed or booze?
> > www.BreastImplantAwareness.og/DisinfoAgents.htm#articles
> >
> > How Andrew M Langer and Mark S Probert operate to infiltrate is
> > outlined there ... both of them ass to ass with Stephen Barrett and
> > Terry Polevoy in the Rag-tag Posse which you claim no alliance with
> > ... although you post verbatim their beliefs, libel and other lies
> > about me.
>
> No, Ilena, I don't know anything about who any of those people are 'ass to
> ass' with because I simply don't have the association with them that you
> have claimed I do over and over and over and over and over again, time and
> time again, relentlessly for the last year or whatever.
Ilena has read all the PR boogie man 'books' and it obviously has hypnotized
her into believing she has it all figured out....that your mother didn't
really have an implant, that you are a spy who is really joined at the hips
and lips to who ever she claims you are. This can go on for years and years
of her justifying being right because you are 'denying'. What a hoot.
> > Susan Schaezler, after finding out my maiden name, began posting
> > research on various family members of mine ... living and dead ...
> > some accurate some not.
Ilena was that before or after you posted a link to the ass.jpg ? ( which
you said was Susan hiding Mplnt......it was a cartoon of a black couple
having anal sex). Did someone say 'vulgar' ???
dragonsgirl
She did whaaaaaaaat?
I mean seriously.
You have GOT to be kidding????
Jan Drew
"dragonsgirl" <drago...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:OBnlg.100644$H71....@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
Jan Drew
> news:OBnlg.100644$H71....@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>> "BreastImplantAwareness.org" <B...@mundo.com> wrote in message
>> news:vkub9216mojv96vs6...@4ax.com...
>> > Whatever your perverted beliefs are ... Betty Jean Hammond Wirsen ...
>> > you are fooling only the other fools and shills.
>
>> Oh brother.
>
>> > Your penchant for attempting to change the history of what happened on
>> > the newsgroup based on the desired happenings of those who battle and
>> > battled me in court ... is laughable.
>> >
>> > I would never know Susan Schaezler or YOU, for that matter, had you
>> > both not made the destruction of my reputation your "business" ...
>> > volunteer or compensated.
>
>> Ilena, I can't speak for Susan S, but the truth of the matter is that
>> your
>> reputation was shot before I ever even knew you existed.
>
>> > Your mentor
>>
>> You toss that word around a lot. Obiously you have no idea what it
>> means.
>
>
> Well, funny you should mention that.
> Ilena announced that Rosa Parks was her mentor, but she'd never even met
> her. Yes, someone point out to her then that she had no idea what it
> meant.
Well, funny Betty announced IIena was my mentor.
Funny.
Searched all groups Results 1 - 50 of 192 for "mentor"
author:col...@pacifier.com (0.32 seconds)
>
>
>
>> Susan Schaezler years ago harassed the State of California
>> > and the IRS about our tiny foundation
>
>> You say it's a foundation with THOUSANDS of supporters...what is it?
>> Tiny
>> or HUGE?
>>
>> Make up your mind for God's sake.
>
> Oh my, you're asking her for accountability with her conflicting stories?
WOW! What blatant liars..both BETTY AND COLEAH ARE!
FACT: Betty did not answer the questions.
>
>
>> > ... with Patrick O'leary hiding
>> > his identity guiding her ... much the same as the SBIPrivateClub which
>> > you deny exists.
>
>> I never denied it's existence.
>> Again, you misquote me...I said that I never posted there to my knowledge
> as
>> YOU claim I have, and I have never SEEN SBIPrivateClub.
>> I didn't say it didn't exist.
>
>
>> > Well, Pat the Plant O'leary
>> > began his interrogations of me asking why we were incorporated. He was
>> > then VP of McGhan in Santa Barbara ... denying his identity with Susan
>> > Schaelzer ... under oath,
>
>
>> You bounce around from one thing to another so that I can't even follow
> you
>> half the time. You start the paragraph talking about Carol
>> Mancini...apparently bitching that I credit her with forming Silicone
> Scene,
>> and then say that she's from Silicone Scene, just as I said. What's the
>> deal?
>
>
>
>> > www.BreastImplantAwareness.og/DisinfoAgents.htm#articles
>> >
>> > How Andrew M Langer and Mark S Probert operate to infiltrate is
>> > outlined there ... both of them ass to ass with Stephen Barrett and
>> > Terry Polevoy in the Rag-tag Posse which you claim no alliance with
>> > ... although you post verbatim their beliefs, libel and other lies
>> > about me.
>>
>> No, Ilena, I don't know anything about who any of those people are 'ass
>> to
>> ass' with because I simply don't have the association with them that you
>> have claimed I do over and over and over and over and over again, time
>> and
>> time again, relentlessly for the last year or whatever.
>
>> > Susan Schaezler, after finding out my maiden name, began posting
>> > research on various family members of mine ... living and dead ...
>> > some accurate some not.
>
>
Peter Bowditch
>> How Andrew M Langer and Mark S Probert operate to infiltrate is
>> outlined there ... both of them ass to ass with Stephen Barrett and
>> Terry Polevoy in the Rag-tag Posse which you claim no alliance with
>> ... although you post verbatim their beliefs, libel and other lies
>> about me.
>
>No, Ilena, I don't know anything about who any of those people are 'ass to
>ass' with because I simply don't have the association with them that you
>have claimed I do over and over and over and over and over again, time and
>time again, relentlessly for the last year or whatever.
As Ilena seems terribly put out by the membership of the Rag Tag
Posse, I have made her an honorary member.
http://www.ratbags.com/posse/whoarewe.htm
--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com
Coleah
Sorry, the photo was actually named fatass.jpg not just plain ass.jpg
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.breast-implant/browse_frm/thread/
36f3b8010bad235d/852ef28390172844?lnk=st&q=fatass.jpg+group%3Aalt.support.br
east-implant&rnum=1&hl=en#852ef28390172844
Coleah
And this goes back to the original posting, and Susan's reply to Ilena.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.support.breast-implant/browse_frm/thread/
5c4b3783f19a2da6/402e3e80bf8f3ca0?lnk=st&q=fatass.jpg+group%3Aalt.support.br
east-implant&rnum=32&hl=en#402e3e80bf8f3ca0
Will Ketcher
Rosenthal's name? --- Quite an eyefull they'll get.
Ilena Rosenthal, rant after rant --- year after year --- ruining her
own 'good' name --- while blaming others.
Ilena Rosenthal has made toast out of her name --- She should be
grateful to be almost 60ish so she needn't be concerned about remaining
work longevity.
BreastImplantAwareness.org
disbarred) repeats the mantra of the Quackwatch Smear Campaign:
>Can we imagine any possible future employers, Googling Ilena
Rosenthal's name? --- Quite an eyefull they'll get.
Not only me ... but the others they sue and lose to ... and others
whose ideas clash with their Pharma / Med Device backed agenda.
When Myrl Jeffcoat came on to fill the ilnternet with much of the lies
and crap and libel she posted ... she would then brag and tell people
to google the Usenet archives to oogle her "work" ...
Betty Wirsen with is doing the identical thing for the identical
reason ...
Not just employers .. but anyone who will read their Smears is their
goal ...
Both Myrl and Betty also spread their smears against me throughout the
support system ... oft, like here, repeating and repeating absolute
and utter lies about me ...
One tenet of Smear Campaigns is to attempt to isolate and make hated
the target ... Willa Nidiffer has gone throughout the internet
labelling fine doctors, acupuncturists, other advocates, anyone who is
close to me in any way, as "Quacks" ... projecting onto them the
quackery of her handlers, Stephen Barrett and crossdressing troll,
Terry Polevoy aka Vera Teasdale.
Mark Probert
> "Mark Probert" <markp...@lumbercartel.com> wrote in message
> news:BBelg.485$PG4...@fe12.lga...
>> Ron wrote:
>>> "Greegor" <Gre...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1150597213....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
>>>> Betty's site had a page full of gag photos
>>>> where Illena's face was photoshopped onto
>>>> various bodies.
>>>>
>>>> Is that smear or logic?
>>> Neither, just stupid.
>> None of the above.
>>
>> "Not needed" is more appropriate.
>
> Everyone view people's artistic freedom of expression differently......
While I do agree that there is artistic freedom, there are so many
better ways of getting the message across. She provides all the "art"
ones needs.
Using altered photos may be fun, but, it makes one look as ill as she is.
dragonsgirl
> Mark S Probert (in denial he is Will Ketcher, in denial he is
> disbarred) repeats the mantra of the Quackwatch Smear Campaign:
See, Ilena, this is the reason that everyone thinks you are nuttier than a
fruit cake.
WE know that Mark is NOT Will. YOU probably know that too. But instead of
admit it and stop hounding Mark about being Will, you just keep the 'big
game' going.
>
> >Can we imagine any possible future employers, Googling Ilena
> Rosenthal's name? --- Quite an eyefull they'll get.
>
>
> Not only me ... but the others they sue and lose to ... and others
> whose ideas clash with their Pharma / Med Device backed agenda.
>
> When Myrl Jeffcoat came on to fill the ilnternet with much of the lies
> and crap and libel she posted ... she would then brag and tell people
> to google the Usenet archives to oogle her "work" ...
>
> Betty Wirsen with is doing the identical thing for the identical
> reason ...
>
> Not just employers .. but anyone who will read their Smears is their
> goal ...
>
> Both Myrl and Betty also spread their smears against me throughout the
> support system ... oft, like here, repeating and repeating absolute
> and utter lies about me ...
Now, come on Ilena, you should really prove that, you know.
I have written anything about you to any 'support system'. I did, for quite
some time, write what I think of you on usenet only...and now my web page.
'Throughout the support system' is a little teensy weensy bit of an
exageration, isn't it.
Mark Probert
>> The director of the Humantics Foundation, Ilena Rosenthal, has emailed
>> family members of posters to try to stifle their complaints against her
>> actions.
>
> Was this beyond seeking peaceful redress of grievances?
As a matter of fact, is was done way beyond seeking the peaceful redress
of grievances.
I was one of her two victims. I had a negative on line relationship with
Ms. Rosenthal over the years and, on several occasions I offered a cease
fire, peace, etc. whatever you want to call it. She flatly refused and
escalated her attacks on me every time I offered peace. She views such
offers as a sign of weakness.
She hunted down my wife and emailed her. She posted, for a brief time, a
web page which identified my children.
Nothing said in the emails to my wife or on that webpage, or her current
webpage, was designed to be flattering. Much of it is inaccurate.
You should also note that she also contacted the wife of another poster.
In that email, which is available on line, she intimated that the male
poster had some prurient interest in her.
Would you not agree that what she has engaged in is clearly stalking
behavior? Is there ever a justification for contacting a spouse who is
not a Usenet participant?
You should also realize the following:
1. In the lawsuit where she was sued by Dr. Barrett, I support her
position, in that she provided just the sort of speech that the First
Amendment is designed to protect. I have conveyed this opinion to her.
2. I have stated that I have my strong doubts about whether implants
should be readily available since they have such a high rate of failure.
I have conveyed this opinion to her.
3. I no longer attack her on a personal basis. I truly believe that she
is seriously mentally ill and does not realize it. Attacking a person
whom I believe to be so is morally wrong. I have conveyed this opinion
to her.
What has caused her to be the recipient of the actions of many others is
her means of dealing with people. She refuses to see that her behavior
contributes to the overall level of hostility. Instead of cooling it
down, she chooses to heat it up.
As for me, I am maintaining my cease fire with her. I will respond to
posts of hers on a substantive basis, and not address her actions.
> Was anything illegal done?
Possibly. Contacting spouses is clearly stalking. It may be criminal.
Greegor
> Was anything illegal done?
Mark Probert
> Possibly. Contacting spouses is clearly stalking. It may be criminal.
Why would contacting spouses be stalking?
Or even contacting an employer?
Have you got a link on legal definition of stalking?
Mark Probert
Spend some time educating yourself.
Contacting family is clearly stalking:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalking
Here are some starters:
http://www.fireflysun.com/book/cyberstalking_law_legislation.php
Her web host:
http://www.fireflysun.com/book/Go_Daddy_Cyberstalking.php
Other information:
http://www.fireflysun.com/cyberstalking_news.html
http://lawcrawler.findlaw.com/MAD/faqabout.htm
You can do your own GoogleSearch for more.
-----
Now, I did ask you some questions, which you removed. I'll repost for
your convenience, and I do hope you will answer. Note that I am not
asking if you thinking her activities are criminal.
1. Would you not agree that what she has engaged in is clearly stalking
behavior?
2. Is there ever a justification for contacting a spouse who is not a
Usenet participant?
I am especially interested in your answer to the second question.
BreastImplantAwareness.org
the Supreme Court of New York specifically prohibiting him from giving
his opinions publicly.
See text of his disbarment:
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/sandraprobert.htm
Mrs. Probert was contacted AFTER Mr Probert called my home / office
and threatened me ...
Mr Probert had used his wife and kids and his version of their lives
on Usenet for years ... discussing personal matters about them ...
Mark Probert
> Mark S Probert is giving legal opinions on Usenet again
Incorrect. They are PERSONAL opinions, and, under the First Amendment,
are my Constitutionally protected right. You do believe that I have the
right of free speech, don't you?
> Mrs. Probert was contacted AFTER Mr Probert called my home / office
> and threatened me ...
Firstly, when I called you, I was trying to protect you from yourself.
At that time you were claiming I was a Mark Probert in Virginia and were
threatening to contact his wife and I tried to warn you. I will not do
you any favors like that again.
Secondly, I did not threaten you.
Thirdly, you contacted my wife at least two years after that phone call.
Clearly, you are playing historical revisionist to try to justify your
stalking behavior.
Fourthly, your behavior toward my family parallels what you did to Andy
Langer. You have a pattern of such behavior, notably toward men who do
not accept your abusive antics.
> Mr Probert had used his wife and kids and his version of their lives
> on Usenet for years ... discussing personal matters about them ...
That is MY right, not your right. YOU do not have the moral right to use
my family to try to intimidate me to leave Usenet as is your clear intent.
Please get help.
BreastImplantAwareness.org
lawyer and never disbarred ... repeated by Witch Wirsen and Coleah
Penley Ayers and others from his Rag-tag Posse) ...
wants to continue his stupid masquerade and pretend to be my victim
... I will be forced to repost HIS messages posted on the Intenet
talking about his wife, his sons and their personal life. You would
think that after being disbarred, going bankrupt and then being busted
for lying about his disbarment on internet ... he would have caused
them enough harm.
Now he is AGAIN using them to lie and pretend he had not publicly and
privately harassed me for years before I contacted his wife with this
polite email.
www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/sandraprobert.htm
BreastImplantAwareness.org
harassed the directors of our foundation previous to me sending a
polite email to his wife.
He was involved in the SBIPrivateClub ... attempting to hunt me down
for false purposes and attempt to get the IRS and the State of
California to remove our non profit status.
This, while NCAHF was suspended by the State of California ... and
still continues to advertise and solicit funds.
dragonsgirl
Don't hold your breath.
FYI, it does little to no good to provide Greg with links to valid
information....he will ask again, and again.
And, probably, again.
And if he DOES happen to read what you have posted here, he will come up
with a totally new angle in favor of Ilena Rosenthal, and he will ask you to
provide yet more information on his new aspect.
Essentially, IMHO, Greg doesn't want info, he wants to keep the ball
rolling.
As long as he can engage you in conversation the longer he does fulfill his
goal.
I'm almost totally certain that Greg KNOWS that Ilena Rosenthal is a
stalker.
I do not know of any instances of Greg, himself, stalking...unless you would
consider studiously looking up information about others as stalking.
I don't know of him contacing others outside usenet, though I have been told
that 'some' in the ACPS group have threatened to contact DFS and make false
reports against those who angered them, I did not believe that totally until
last night when Greg himself made a somewhat powdered sugar coated threat to
do exactly that to myself...
So, now, I guess Greg IS a stalker.
He takes lessons from the best of them.
If I were you, I wouldn't waste my time actually trying to educate him on
the law....Kane has repeatedly tried to do so for years and it's made no
impact what so ever.
Betty
PS The irony of his questions and statements almost floors me in laughter
sometimes....he asks why do I post to ASBI when I do not have breast
implants. THAT coming from a man who posts to ASCPS and has no children.
Am I the only person who sees humor in this?
>
Coleah
Even if she contacts your wife again or your children next time?
Will Ketcher
contacted Dr. Zaffuto, CEO of Humantics Foundation, Ilena Rosenthal
demanded that Andy not call Dr. Zaffuto again. All this, was after
Ilena Rosenthal had contacted Andy Langer's wife.
Ilena Rosenthal clearly believes she should enjoy certain immunity,
while none is provided others.
It should also be remembered, Dr. Zaffuto, as CEO of Humantics
Foundation, is fair game as contact in the misbehaviors of his
Director, Ilena Rosental, in the operation of the foundation --- As is
Rozann Rob, Ilena's sister, who is acting as the Secretary.
Angelo A. Zaffuto
CEO Humantics Foundation
200 N. El Camino Real
Oceanside, California 92054-1768
Rozann Rob
Secretary Humantics Foundation
1113 Abrams Road, Apartment # 242
Richardson, Texas 75081-5564
Coleah
> BreastImplantAwareness.org wrote:
> > Mark S Probert is giving legal opinions on Usenet again
>
> Incorrect. They are PERSONAL opinions, and, under the First Amendment,
> are my Constitutionally protected right. You do believe that I have the
> right of free speech, don't you?
>
> > Mrs. Probert was contacted AFTER Mr Probert called my home / office
> > and threatened me ...
>
> Firstly, when I called you, I was trying to protect you from yourself.
> At that time you were claiming I was a Mark Probert in Virginia and were
> threatening to contact his wife and I tried to warn you. I will not do
> you any favors like that again.
Who knows how many 'wrong numbers' Ilena has called over the years while
searching for family members? We've only heard of the calls that connected
to the right people.
Does anyone wonder why donations are down for the Humantics Foundation?
People see how Ilena Rosenthal the Director spends the foundation's money on
long distance phone calls to harass wives and leave innuendo's of a
husband's extra-marital 'interest' in her.
> Secondly, I did not threaten you.
She never comes out with any specific 'threat' does she?
> Thirdly, you contacted my wife at least two years after that phone call.
> Clearly, you are playing historical revisionist to try to justify your
> stalking behavior.
Oops....she can't use that as an excuse then. How about the 'leave me
alone' crap?
> Fourthly, your behavior toward my family parallels what you did to Andy
> Langer. You have a pattern of such behavior, notably toward men who do
> not accept your abusive antics.
Ah yes.....the 'ole 'pattern' in multiples. That is most telling of all.
> > Mr Probert had used his wife and kids and his version of their lives
> > on Usenet for years ... discussing personal matters about them ...
"USED"????? If he shared his personal life and they are a part of his
personal life, it's hardly 'using'. We've all been enriched through
learning about his son's activities. And what the hell does Ilena 'think'
he used them for?
Coleah
> If Mr Probert (Will Ketcher in denail ... he also denies he was ever a
> lawyer and never disbarred ... repeated by Witch Wirsen and Coleah
> Penley Ayers and others from his Rag-tag Posse) ...
Mark is NOT Will Ketcher. I know that one for a FACT.
I have no concrete knowledge that Mark S Probert is the actual person who
posts on usenet using the name Mark S Probert. Furthermore.....I don't
care.
I do know that Ilena displays characteristics of someone with untreated
mental illness.
> wants to continue his stupid masquerade and pretend to be my victim
> ... I will be forced to repost HIS messages posted on the Intenet
> talking about his wife, his sons and their personal life.
Does Ilena think she is threatening to do something harmful
by reminding us about Mark's beautiful family? Hello ???
> You would
> think that after being disbarred, going bankrupt and then being busted
> for lying about his disbarment on internet ... he would have caused
> them enough harm.
Those are all things that you Ilena, have stated as
facts.....to what? harm Mark????
BTW - What did you learn after Jimmy dumped your happy ass?
[Mark has a loving and mentally stable wife, and a family which endures.]
0:->
> Greg wrote
>> Was anything illegal done?
>
> Mark Probert
>> Possibly. Contacting spouses is clearly stalking. It may be criminal.
>
> Why would contacting spouses be stalking?
It would be under two circumstances: if the individual asked not to be
contacted except as per prior agreement; and if there is a non-contact
order from the court.
> Or even contacting an employer?
Same thing if an employer asks not to be contacted except officially.
> Have you got a link on legal definition of stalking?
You are constantly asking other people to prove something rather than
for YOU to prove your argument by YOU providing definitions.
An attempt to insinuate THEIR argument is bogus...and alleviating YOU of
responsibility to support your claim, or with you, more often your
insinuation.
In other words, Child, you are just a little thug dancing about the
edges of argument, making a total fool of yourself.
So, provide the legal definition you ask for, or shut your fuckin' pie
hole, stupid.
0:->
--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)
dragonsgirl
"0:->" <pohak...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uKidnaMsDt_JSwvZ...@scnresearch.com...
> Greegor wrote:
> > Greg wrote
> >> Was anything illegal done?
> >
> > Mark Probert
> >> Possibly. Contacting spouses is clearly stalking. It may be criminal.
> >
> > Why would contacting spouses be stalking?
>
> It would be under two circumstances: if the individual asked not to be
> contacted except as per prior agreement; and if there is a non-contact
> order from the court.
>
> > Or even contacting an employer?
>
> Same thing if an employer asks not to be contacted except officially.
>
> > Have you got a link on legal definition of stalking?
>
> You are constantly asking other people to prove something rather than
> for YOU to prove your argument by YOU providing definitions.
>
> An attempt to insinuate THEIR argument is bogus...and alleviating YOU of
> responsibility to support your claim, or with you, more often your
> insinuation.
>
> In other words, Child, you are just a little thug dancing about the
> edges of argument, making a total fool of yourself.
>
> So, provide the legal definition you ask for, or shut your fuckin' pie
> hole, stupid.
>
> 0:->
Psssst. OS, did you see that post in this thread in which Greg threatens to
bombard DFS with phone calls about me to cause removal of a child in my
home?
Now, I know that you don't go in for the 'telling tales out of school'
stuff, and keep confidences you have been entrusted with pretty well...
So, really, when you claim that the antiCPS groups do that, and they say
'prove it', you have refrained from doing so just to keep someone else's
confidentiality...
BUT...since Greg was so kind as to share that threat in a public NG, you
may, with my permission, now and forever use those statements as proof of
those threats usually said to not exist, or ever have been made.
Save it, you may find some family who needs that in the future.
0:->
No....OUR Honorable Greg Hansen? Couldn't be.
> Now, I know that you don't go in for the 'telling tales out of school'
> stuff, and keep confidences you have been entrusted with pretty well...
> So, really, when you claim that the antiCPS groups do that, and they say
> 'prove it', you have refrained from doing so just to keep someone else's
> confidentiality...
Yep. Tough call, but I'd rather take a hit than betray a trust.
> BUT...since Greg was so kind as to share that threat in a public NG, you
> may, with my permission, now and forever use those statements as proof of
> those threats usually said to not exist, or ever have been made.
Thank you.
> Save it, you may find some family who needs that in the future.
Please direct me to the post. I've been off on a tour for a few days
since Thursday the past week. Missed some posts. Saw a lot of scenery
instead. Didn't even haul my laptop along. 0:->
Thanks, Kane
dragonsgirl
Opps, sorry, it was under a different thread.
Here is a link to the googled archive of it:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.diseases.lyme/msg/09d798a760325fef?dmode=source&hl=en
And just in case you need a usenet copy, I also have that on my computer as
it came through my newsreader.
Jan Drew
"Mark Probert" blathered the same old lies.
<snip>
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med/msg/eac0698e78a0163c
March 21: 9:16 am 2006
. If you, and Jan, want to dredge up ancient
history, feel free. I do not play that game anymore.
If you continue to post with the same attitude, I will correctly
assume that you, too, in addition to Jan, want the war to continue.
I do not.
Jan Drew
>> Greg wrote
>>> Was anything illegal done?
>>
>> Mark Probert
>>> Possibly. Contacting spouses is clearly stalking. It may be criminal.
>>
>> Why would contacting spouses be stalking?
>>
>> Or even contacting an employer?
>>
>> Have you got a link on legal definition of stalking?
>
> Spend some time educating yourself.
>
> Contacting family is clearly stalking:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalking
Spend some time educating yourself, Greg!
Subject: Re: Mark Probert ... pretending to be sick woman to infiltrate my
Support Group
>Return-Path: <marla_map...@hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [24.184.88.114]
>From: "Marla Maples" <marla_map...@hotmail.com> To: i...@san.rr.com
>Subject: Listserv? Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2002 06:50:44 -0800
>Good morning!
>I am a woman who was harmed by breast implants. I had them removed, but I
>am still sick with FM and CFS.
>I read the newsgroup where you are medciless atacked. I feel so sorry for
>you.
>I see that you have a support listserv. Can I sign up? That way, I can
>avoid reading all that horrible stuff.
>Marla Maples Medford, OR
>[24.184.88.114] Optimum Online (Cablevision Systems Corporation)
>(NETBLK-OOL-2BLK) 1111 Stewart Avenue Bethpage, NY 11797 US
>~~~~~~~~
>Return-Path: <marla_map...@hotmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [24.184.88.114]
>From: "Marla Maples" <marla_map...@hotmail.com> To: i...@san.rr.com
>Subject: Need support! Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 05:27:43 -0800
>Dear Ilena:
>I need help dealing with my day to day problems of CFS and FM. I had
>impants, which were fortunately removed. I was sick every day for two years
>before that surgery.
>Even today, I and ill. I have CFS and FM, and I am in constant pain. How do
>women cope with this?
>I would like to join your support group and get your email messages. Please
>tell me how.
>Marla
==
[written by Mark, NOT his wife, proven by the very same typing coming
straight from Mark, spelling
errors].
Dear Mrs. Drew:
I am using email to you since I do not wish to participate in Usenet. I
trust that you *wil* respect this. I *wil* not email you again, except to
forward to you other emails that Rosenthal has sent to me. She had the
unmitigated gall to actually post this email to a webpage, which she
acknowledges, and has since removed. She had the nerve to post my place of
employment in the newsgroups and on that webpage.
Frankly, I am tired of your constant blaming Mark for everything that
Rosenthal has done to him. This email was sent to ME, not him, by her. He
had warned her several times not to do so, but, she went ahead and emailed
me. I have spoken with some of Mark's friends in government law enforcement,
and they tell me that this can be construed as stalking behavior, since I
have never had contact with her.
Let me be blunt: I have been fully aware of Mark's activities from day one
as we share *verything* in our relationship. He has NEVER posted as Will
Ketcher, and we have not had an AOL account for a long time. However,
Rosenthal persists in accusing him.
Let me clear up this issue Mark's attempt to infiltrate her email list. He
has never denied doing so, and has clearly stated his reasons, which
Rosenthal rejects. When he mentioned that our younger son was about to have
surgery he began receiving some very nasty email which sounded quite a bit
like Rosenthal. I read them, and know that they were hate filled and
mirrored her usual verbiage. Some of them actually wished ill to our son.
Remember, I am an English teacher and I spend hours a day reading students'
work. I also felt that they could have originated with people who were
affiliated with her.
Mark was deeply offended by some of the statements in these emails, and he
attempted to locate the senders, but was unsuccessful. He then decided to
try to read her group to see if he could identify the offending individuals.
As you know, she found out what he did, and posted a message to that effect.
Mark *immeidatrely* acknowledged what he did, and expressed his reasons,
which she denied and said that we never received such email, even though she
had absolutely no way of reading his email inbox.
You have been *concistently*wrong about Mark, and even more consistently
wrong about Mark. I have read many instances where it was clear that you did
not *udnerstand* what he was saying. Now that you do not read his full
messages (many times you respond to something that has been severely edited)
or his replies, you are making assumptions based on less than all the facts.
If you were my student, you would get an F.
When I first received this email I was very upset by her actions, and I
wanted to file complaints with Hotmail, RoadRunner and GoDaddy, her website
host. Mark talked me out of it, as he does not think that such actions *wil
lhelp* her. In fact, he is convinced that she *wil* become even more abusive
and obsessed with "enemies." You know that I have every right to make such
complaints.
Several of my students have used her website about Mark in their *wrtiings*
in my senior honors writing seminar. Another group has used Rosenthal in a
debate in my senior debating class. They used her to demonstrate that the
First Amendment, which is posted in Mark's study, protects even the most
vile people. I gave them an A.
I trust that this helps you get a better perspective on Mark, and on
Rosenthal.
As I said above, I will not email you again, but I will forward all of her
current messages to me.
If you wish to respond to me, please do so at SandraProb...@hotmail.com. I
am using my professional email address simply because that is the address
Rosenthal used.
Sandra Probert
Subj: What evidence?
Date: 9/6/2004 10:23:00 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: kramtreb...@hotmail.com
To: jdrew63...@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
In the post below you agree with Ilena. How the hell do you know it was
Henry other than he lives in San Diego? Big deal. Lots of people live in San
Diego.
Six of my classmates live there.
Twenty of my family live there.
Nine of the men I served with in the Army live there.
ALL of them could have, if I had asked, taken the picture.
Ilena merely wants to discredit henry, as she is afraid of well informed
intelligent people.
You support her abusive tactics with posts like this one.
Return-Path: <kramtreb...@hotmail.com>
Received: from rly-xb06.mx.aol.com (rly-xb06.mail.aol.com [172.20.64.138])
by
air-xb01.mail.aol.com (v101_r1.3) with ESMTP id MAILINXB13-6cb413caaf327e;
Mon,
06 Sep 2004 14:23:00 -0400
Received: from hotmail.com (bay10-f41.bay10.hotmail.com [64.4.37.41]) by
rly-xb06.mx.aol.com (v101_r1.2) with ESMTP id
MAILRELAYINXB69-6cb413caaf327e�
Mon, 06 Sep 2004 14:22:43 -0400
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
Mon, 6 Sep 2004 11:18:26 -0700
Received: from 68.194.64.219 by by10fd.bay10.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;
Mon, 06 Sep 2004 18:18:26 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [68.194.64.219]
X-Originating-Email: [kramtreb...@hotmail.com]
X-Sender: kramtreb...@hotmail.com
From: "Kram Treborp" <kramtreb...@hotmail.com>
To: jdrew63...@aol.com
Subject: What evidence?
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2004 14:18:26 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <BAY10-F41XojzJlnR9q0005b...@hç’·tmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Sep 2004 18:18:26.0922 (UTC)
FILETIME=[E763F4A0:01C4943D]
X-AOL-IP: 64.4.37.41
X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:0:0:
X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0
OrgName: Optimum Online (Cablevision Systems)
OrgID: OPTO
Address: 111 new south RD
City: Hicksville
StateProv: NY
PostalCode: 11801
Country: US
Newsgroups: misc.health.alternative
From: "M,a,r,k P,r,o,b,e,r,t-September 7, 2004" <M,a,r,k P,r,o,b,e,r,t
09-07...@lambercartel.com> - Find messages by this author
Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2004 00:56:10 GMT
Local: Tues,Sep 7 2004 8:56 pm
Subject: Re: Mark Probert Can't stand To Not Be Heard
Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show original |
Report Abuse
"Orac" <o...@wlsfanmail.com> wrote in message
news:orac-2B9CCF.2...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
> In article <20040907135449.04966.00003...ç‘»mb-m24.aol.com>,
> jdrew63...@aol.com (Jan) wrote:
> > Even though, I have asked him several times NOT to e-mail me privately,
he as
> > his past behavior shows is still yet using a different addy to get by my
> > filtering him. He is killfiled and cant stand it.
> > CEASE AND DESIST! do not e-mail me privately.
> > This is the final warning.
> Or else what?
> One wonders.
Well, she posted my ISP information, so I guess she will be whining to them
if I send her another email.
Jan Drew
8:37 AM
As for me, I am maintaining my cease fire with her. I will respond to
posts of hers on a substantive basis, and not address her actions.
> BreastImplantAwareness.org wrote:
>> Mark S Probert is giving legal opinions on Usenet again
>
> Incorrect. They are PERSONAL opinions, and, under the First Amendment, are
> my Constitutionally protected right. You do believe that I have the right
> of free speech, don't you?
>
>> Mrs. Probert was contacted AFTER Mr Probert called my home / office
>> and threatened me ...
>
> Firstly, when I called you, I was trying to protect you from yourself. At
> that time you were claiming I was a Mark Probert in Virginia and were
> threatening to contact his wife and I tried to warn you. I will not do you
> any favors like that again.
LOL!!!!
Poor Mark. When he does it it is a*** *favor****
>
> Secondly, I did not threaten you.
>
> Thirdly, you contacted my wife at least two years after that phone call.
> Clearly, you are playing historical revisionist to try to justify your
> stalking behavior.
As for me, I am maintaining my cease fire with her. I will respond to
posts of hers on a substantive basis, and not address her actions.
>
> Fourthly, your behavior toward my family parallels what you did to Andy
> Langer. You have a pattern of such behavior, notably toward men who do not
> accept your abusive antics.
As for me, I am maintaining my cease fire with her. I will respond to
posts of hers on a substantive basis, and not address her actions.
>
>> Mr Probert had used his wife and kids and his version of their lives
>> on Usenet for years ... discussing personal matters about them ...
>
> That is MY right, not your right. YOU do not have the moral right to use
> my family to try to intimidate me to leave Usenet as is your clear intent.
>
> Please get help.
Do that...liar.
>
Jan Drew
>
> "Mark Probert" <markp...@lumbercartel.com> wrote in message
> news:dTylg.19$JV...@fe11.lga...
>> BreastImplantAwareness.org wrote:
>> > Mark S Probert is giving legal opinions on Usenet again
>>
>> Incorrect. They are PERSONAL opinions, and, under the First Amendment,
>> are my Constitutionally protected right. You do believe that I have the
>> right of free speech, don't you?
>>
>> > Mrs. Probert was contacted AFTER Mr Probert called my home / office
>> > and threatened me ...
>>
>> Firstly, when I called you, I was trying to protect you from yourself.
>> At that time you were claiming I was a Mark Probert in Virginia and were
>> threatening to contact his wife and I tried to warn you. I will not do
>> you any favors like that again.
>
> Who knows how many 'wrong numbers' Ilena has called over the years while
> searching for family members? We've only heard of the calls that
> connected
> to the right people.
O thy hypocrite!!!!!
Like doing a reverse phone directory??
>
> Does anyone wonder why donations are down for the Humantics Foundation?
> People see how Ilena Rosenthal the Director spends the foundation's money
> on
> long distance phone calls to harass wives and leave innuendo's of a
> husband's extra-marital 'interest' in her.
>
>
>
>> Secondly, I did not threaten you.
> She never comes out with any specific 'threat' does she?
>
>> Thirdly, you contacted my wife at least two years after that phone call.
>> Clearly, you are playing historical revisionist to try to justify your
>> stalking behavior.
>
> Oops....she can't use that as an excuse then. How about the 'leave me
> alone' crap?
Oops...*As for me, I am maintaining my cease fire with her. I will respond
to
posts of hers on a substantive basis, and not address her actions.*
>
>
>> Fourthly, your behavior toward my family parallels what you did to Andy
>> Langer. You have a pattern of such behavior, notably toward men who do
>> not accept your abusive antics.
>
> Ah yes.....the 'ole 'pattern' in multiples. That is most telling of all.
Ah, yes...As for me, I am maintaining my cease fire with her. I will respond
to
posts of hers on a substantive basis, and not address her actions.
>
>
>
Jan Drew
>
> "BreastImplantAwareness.org" <B...@mundo.com> wrote in message
> news:hded92ht39p0t914r...@4ax.com...
>> If Mr Probert (Will Ketcher in denail ... he also denies he was ever a
>> lawyer and never disbarred ... repeated by Witch Wirsen and Coleah
>> Penley Ayers and others from his Rag-tag Posse) ...
>
> Mark is NOT Will Ketcher. I know that one for a FACT.
> I have no concrete knowledge that Mark S Probert is the actual person who
> posts on usenet using the name Mark S Probert. Furthermore.....I don't
> care.
>
> I do know that Ilena displays characteristics of someone with untreated
> mental illness.
ROTFLOL!!!!
Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.>
Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.Ilena's
Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.>
Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth >
Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.>
Pervasive.Iena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.>
Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.Ilena's
Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.>
Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth >
Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.>
Pervasive.Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth >
Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.>
Pervasive.Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.Ilena's Mouth > Huge.>
Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's
Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.>
Pervasive.
Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.>
Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.Ilena's
Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.
Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.>
Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.Ilena's
Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.
Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.>
Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.Ilena's
Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.
Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.>
Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.Ilena's
Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.
Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.>
Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.Ilena's
Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.>
Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth >
Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.
Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.>
Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.Ilena's
Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.>
Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive. Ilena's Mouth >
Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.Ilena's Mouth > Huge.> Enormous.> Pervasive.
In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my
> opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion, > In my opinion,
People are on earth to express their love and acceptance of
one another. With some folks we have a harder time accepting
even one cell about them that is lovable, so our communication
with them is.....ah, at a pretty low level. It's a waste of time
to dwell too long with our 'low-level loved ones', for we also
appear as such.
I hope you don't get stuck in that muck, as I have in the past.
Coleah
>
>
>> wants to continue his stupid masquerade and pretend to be my victim
>> ... I will be forced to repost HIS messages posted on the Intenet
>> talking about his wife, his sons and their personal life.
>
> Does Ilena think she is threatening to do something harmful
> by reminding us about Mark's beautiful family? Hello ???
>
>
>> You would
>> think that after being disbarred, going bankrupt and then being busted
>> for lying about his disbarment on internet ... he would have caused
>> them enough harm.
>
> Those are all things that you Ilena, have stated as
> facts.....to what? harm Mark????
>
> BTW - What did you learn after Jimmy dumped your happy ass?
> [Mark has a loving and mentally stable wife, and a family which endures.]
Oops. I have no concrete knowledge that Mark S Probert is the actual person
who
> posts on usenet using the name Mark S Probert. Furthermore.....I don't
> care.
==
She ONLY cares about harassing IIena!!!!
Will Ketcher
so Jan won't suffer a seizure. You have been informed many times that
I am not Mark Probert --- even though we post from different ISPs ---
and from different parts of the country, you continue your denial.
You will never be able to prove your false statements regarding this.
Because your versions of things are not the truth. You have no proof
--- because you cannot prove something that isn't so. You know it ---
and many others know it as well.
Will Ketcher
Humantics Foundation are 'fair game' for contact --- Their Director is
abusing and libeling those she says she is advocating for. There are
vast numbers of irregularities in the way Humantics Foundation conducts
it's business.
The officers of Humantics Foundation are legally libel for the misdeeds
of Ilena Rosenthal, their Director.
Jan Drew
"Will Ketcher" <will_k...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1150757400....@r2g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Ms. Ilena --- you are the one in denial --- I'll correct your spelling,
> so Jan won't suffer a seizure.
Yupper...was just bout ready to see it I could find some DRUGS for that.
You have been informed many times that
> I am not Mark Probert --- even though we post from different ISPs ---
> and from different parts of the country, you continue your denial.
>
> You will never be able to prove your false statements regarding this.
> Because your versions of things are not the truth. You have no proof
> --- because you cannot prove something that isn't so. You know it ---
> and many others know it as well.
Speaking of not having proof of false statements.
Have you seen Mark Probert's LONG list?
Ah.. Willy?
Will Ketcher
can't say one way or another about things he says.
I can however emphatically say I am not Mark Probert. You and Ilena,
can go on saying anything about that you like --- but you cannot and
will not be able to prove your untrue words in that regard.
mark.p...@gmail.com
0:-> wrote:
> Greegor wrote:
> > Greg wrote
> >> Was anything illegal done?
> >
> > Mark Probert
> >> Possibly. Contacting spouses is clearly stalking. It may be criminal.
> >
> > Why would contacting spouses be stalking?
>
> It would be under two circumstances: if the individual asked not to be
> contacted except as per prior agreement; and if there is a non-contact
> order from the court.
>
> > Or even contacting an employer?
>
> Same thing if an employer asks not to be contacted except officially.
>
> > Have you got a link on legal definition of stalking?
>
> You are constantly asking other people to prove something rather than
> for YOU to prove your argument by YOU providing definitions.
>
> An attempt to insinuate THEIR argument is bogus...and alleviating YOU of
> responsibility to support your claim, or with you, more often your
> insinuation.
>
> In other words, Child, you are just a little thug dancing about the
> edges of argument, making a total fool of yourself.
>
> So, provide the legal definition you ask for, or shut your fuckin' pie
> hole, stupid.
Not inthose words,but, I do agree. If Greg wants answers, he has to
start to answer.