There are people who solve problems... and then... there are people who create problems.
Suze is a person who creates problems.
I can tell everyone for fact, that Katie did not get her link from the Eviliz blog.
March 14th, is this blog's second anniversary in operation. In that time... we've never intentionally re-used threads from the Eviliz blog.
Yes... bloggers sometimes discuss Eviliz material in my comments section... which I frown upon, and try to discourage. (I try to discourage it, for this very reason... it brings folks like Suze in the door). But, as for intentionally using their material... it doesn't happen. Matt (from Eviliz) is very well aware of this, and for the most part, we co-exist amicably.
Suze thinks she's helping Matt. She's not. All Suze is doing here, is creating problems and discord for Matt, over nothing.
Matt doesn't need Suze's help... take my word for it.
Matt can thank Suze, for wherever this headache now takes us.
Thank You Suze. This is yet another, of your fabulous TLB contributuions.
It's an amazing accomplishment, Lynyrd. Given the subject matter has been beaten to death and the burnout of other Manson blogs, what you have done in keeping things fresh and lively is a real testimony to your creative mind.
And kudos to Katie. "the nature of the beast" is so true. You can't be a bartender and not expect to deal with drunken obnoxiousness. And you can't be a blogger and not expect to deal with irrational nastiness. Try a Red Sox blog if you want real nastiness.
Congratulations on 300,000 hits!! I'm not really sure what a "hit" is, but as Clint Eastwood said, "I guess it's better than a poke in the eye with a pointy stick".
Last night on Star City Radio, Brian mentioned the musical group "The LaBianca's". Apparently, they are a duo, with the female member being "Lena Marquise". I did a bit of looking, and Lena describes herself as an "erotic artist". I found a vid of her on an "erotic" website called Redtube, I won't post a link here as it is very graphic. If anyone wants to see it, search a vid entitled "Solo Ritual by Lena Marquise". I'm nearly certain it's her as music by "The LaBicana's" is playing in the background. I would describe it as very "Mansonesque".
Finally, CieloDrive.com has uploaded an interview with Paul Crockett. It gives the date as being Oct. 3, 1969. I think the Barker raids were on Oct. 10 and 12. So I assume this audio was recorded about 1 week before the Barker raids. The audio is clear, Crockett mentions Watkins, Poston, Wildebush and Juan Flynn. I think he refers to Charlie as a "lunatic". It's worth a listen.
Lynyrd, congrats on all the hard work. I enjoy your blog immensely.
Katie, way to ignore idiots!!
My mom always told me that the biggest insult you can give to someone is to ignore their existence. You turn the power dynamic that way. And smiling widely is another way to piss them off!! lol
This blog rocks so much! Amazing info with amazing people: Lynyrd,Katie,Leary,Doc,Kimichi,St. And etc.
Ignore all the hate. And to those who bash people's opinions with extreme negativity, here's a friendly reminder: Fact is, no except good old Chuck, Katie,Leslie,Sadie,Tex,Linda and certain other family members perhaps know the REAL truth and everything
I really think that Charlie is the only one who knows the real truth.
Not Tex, Sadie, Pat, Leslie, Bruce, Clem, Linda, Sandy, Lynn, Gypsy or any of the others. They were all pawns.
I think they were all fed what Charlie wanted them to know.
That old buzzard will go to his grave with the knowledge of what really happened.
And it doesn't matter how many interviews he gives, how many letters he writes, how many "friends" he makes or how many people he chooses to "confide in".
He will never allow us to know the truth. I think that is his little joke on all of us. A vestige that comes with the honor of senility.
katie8753 said...He will never allow us to know the truth. I think that is his little joke on all of us. A vestige that comes with the honor of senility
If He does know and isn't saying its not His joke on us its because snitching is frowned upon in the world He grew up in.
Matt, loved your video. You look like a guy who is easy going and laid back. A guy who emerged from 1968 into NOW. Sitting in a cushioned chair hanging from the ceiling like we had in the 60's. LOL.
Great stuff.
I do think Charlie knows the truth. And I don't think he's not revealing it because he's not a snitch. I think he's not revealing it because it's the only thing keeping him in the lime light. Once he reveals it, he'll be dropped like a bag of dirt by reporters and most bloggers alike.
And they said you cats would never make it: that you'd fail in a blaze of ignominy, that you'd crash in humiliating failure, that you'd be in jail long before you'd hit 300K. Actually, it was just me saying those things and boy was I wrong!!! Congrats guys and onward to 1 billion hits.
You're one of my favorite posters here... and, you've never said one thing about the case! LOL
It just goes to show ya... you can have good friends on these blogs, and never discuss TLB at all.
There was another blogger named "Alice" that came around for years. She was a British lady, and funny as hell. She never discussed the case with us, either... but, popped-in all the time, just to say hello. I met her, long before this blog opened. Ironically, her avatar was of a baby, as well.
Then one day, she just disappeared. Sometimes, I still wonder what happened to "Baby Alice".
I also just wanna apologize if Im fairly new and not as sharp as anyone else. I've always been interested in the life of the Family, and it's been fairly recent that I've decided to take a closer look at the trial and motives. I can only hope my comments are appreciated!
Bobby I'm sorry you endured that crap at the Col's blog, but truth be told, if you will just stay away from there he can't hurt you or St. Circumstance.
If you guys will just not comment on this blog, he'll end up with 3 comments, and 2 of those will be his.
Let him argue with himself. You guys are both so special to me.
Please just stay out of harm's way. At the end of the day, your comments won't have the effect you want and you will be better off just laying off.
And as the great FrankM so greatly reflected and AFFECTED, along with the sweet, wispy, hard-knocks and violeted Scarlett O'Hara: ..Tomorrow is Another Day.
The second part of the Paul Crockett police interview has been posted on Cielodrive.com.
Apparently, Crockett began talking to police officers near Barker around Sept. 29. and apparently had contact with them over the next few days. At some point, the police apparently tell Crockett to drive out of there in a Power Wagon if Charlie comes back up there. Crockett says he wouldn't drive out of there "for all the grits in Dixie". Crockett assumed Manson was watching the exits.
Crockett also mentioned "Tex". I think I read Watson fled Barker the day before the raid, so I guess that would be around Oct. 9.
At this time, I guess the police were investigating the arson on the earth mover, they probably had no idea of the connection to TLB at this time. Certainly, some people up in Barker knew about it, Manson, Watson, etc. but others didn't, or had only heard rumors, Crockett, Watkins, etc.
Walking the dog in McGolrick Park today I found myself reflecting on recent posts here and in other Manson blogs. It’s not often that my Brooklyn life is disturbed by the Manson madness, but I was wondering why some people here seem to have got their underwear so screwed up just recently. When I came back in I sat down and typed up what was going through my mind.
You can think of the following as Frank’s Five Follies .
ONE: Don’t expect others to feel the way you do. Why should they? Pretty much for every post you make, someone, somewhere, is going to be upset by it. Most likely their right to post is the same as yours. Their arguments may be as strong to them as yours are to you. If you’re likely to get offended, then maybe you’re better off not posting. As the saying goes, ‘if you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen”.
TWO: The ONLY thing to do with trolls is to ignore them. If we all stopped feeding the trolls, the blogs we frequent would be less acrimonious places.
THREE: If you find yourself in a flaming match, just STOP. Don’t go on and on, explaining, justifying yourself. Most likely no one cares, anyway. We’re not real people here. Fortunately.
FOUR: Take time out to understand the Internet. Learn to identify socks and trolls. Learn poster’s styles. A long established poster is unlikely to suddenly change his/her posting style because you ask or want him to. Choose who you want to interact with. If someone winds you up, don’t reply to them, IGNORE them. It’ll better for you, and better for others on the blog.
FIVE: Finally, and feel free to disagree with this (most people seem to), post when you have something relevant to say that you think might be of interest or entertainment to others. Don’t feel obliged to express an opinion on anything and everything. The most respected posters here seem to be those who post infrequently, informedly, in a civil tone and stay on topic.
The Col is a miserable bully. plain and simple. Not worth anybody's consternation. I respond from time to time to his crap just for the mental exercise, but I am a million time happier interacting with Doc or Bobby or Lauren or Saint or a dozen others on these blogs.
Katie, I do have a slightly different twist on why Charlie doesn't come clean. I have shared it with Lynyrd but it is one of those 'shot in the dark' things. I think Charlie continues to distance himself from TLB because it invalidated him as a Prophet. The Black community barely reacted to TLB. I think Charlie still obsesses about achieving Prophet status down the road. Maybe there will be a race war someday in America. And of course the environment is going to tank so he will be right there. But as there were 5,000 higher credential environmental folk making the same forecast who care what a mass murderer says. But I honestly do think Manson believes he is a unique individual and blessed with special gifts. He wants to be recognized for that so as such he cannot confess to such ineptitude as TLB. That's just the way I feel. carry on. I do think a party for Lynyrd is in order when LSB3 hits a half million.
I don't know, Frank. You are highly respected both here and elsewhere, but I never seem to understand exactly what you are saying. I have always felt that blogs were places where people could vent and theorize within reason. No offense. but you come across as a bit of a purist who seems irritated with human nature. Of course when folk hold strong and opposite opinions they are going to clash. It is, as Katie said recently, 'the nature of the beast'. You clearly aspire to a higher form of 'the beast'. More power to ya. But, if on a thread about post counts, the lovely Katie offers up her opinion on why Charlie remains silent, then I am going to feel free to respond to that, even if it does offend your sense of internet etiquitte. I fully expect that I qualify as one of your dreaded trolls, and honestly that doesn't faze me at all. Takes all types to make an interesting blog.
Leary you could be quite right in your assessment of the reason for Charlie's silence.
You know I was thinking, Charlie was big on "not snitching", but I think that he encouraged Sandy & Squeaky to "snitch" on everyone living at Spahn's or Barker's Ranch when he wasn't around, so that "the soul" would have all information and knowledge in order to appear to be "omnipotent".
yeah. I gotta slightly disagree Katie. I do think Frank was referring to the folk who clashed this weekend. And for some strange reason I feel the need to back up the Saint as well as defend myself. Weird, given our history. But I feel the Saint has really worked hard to be more professional and he deserves credit for that. And the Col is just a rightous ass. Sometimes you just gotta call a spade a spade.
Leary, Katie is quite right in that none of the above was written with you in mind (although if you feel the cap fits, …)
What follows, however, is directed at you with the aim of spelling out a little more clearly what I wanted to say in my previous post, although may interest others.
There is a concept known as ‘the cooperative principle’, which purports to describe human interactions. It comes from the work of a man called Paul Grice, and in his words consists of the injunction to "Make your contribution such as it is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged." [It sounds like an order but was intended to be a description].
Grice holds that if listeners and speakers aspire to mutually effective communication they must respect four ‘maxims’ which explain the relationship between what is said and what is understood.
These are:
• the ‘Maxim of Quality’ [Be Truthful; Do not say what you believe to be false. Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.]
• the ‘Maxim of Quantity’ [Quantity of Information; Make your contribution as informative as is required; Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.]
• the ‘Maxim of Relation’ [Relevance; Be relevant.]
• the ‘Maxim of Manner’ [Be Clear; Avoid obscurity of expression; Avoid ambiguity; Be brief; Be orderly.]
The failure of posters to respect these maxims is frequently seen here and in other blogs. This is the point I was wanting to make.
>>>Leary said: But I feel the Saint has really worked hard to be more professional and he deserves credit for that. And the Col is just a rightous ass. Sometimes you just gotta call a spade a spade.>>>
I couldn't agree more. I think that you and St. Circumstance rocked this weekend. Kudos to you both!!
>>>Leary said: But I feel the Saint has really worked hard to be more professional and he deserves credit for that. And the Col is just a rightous ass. Sometimes you just gotta call a spade a spade Thats exactly what He wants You to do. The Col is a Professional button pusher.
Many times... (in fact, most times)... "less is more".
At times... I'm guilty of giving too much credence to troublemakers myself. I always regret it.
Troublemakers, are looking for attention. It's as simple, as that. They don't care if that attention is positive or negative. If you fight with them... you're giving them exactly what they want. By doing so, you're ensuring that they'll return.
Everyone likes to be heard. If you ignore anyone enough times, they will eventually grow bored... feel powerless... and leave. And eventually, they'll stop coming back altogether. (One of Frank's points)
Problem is... In a group this large... there's always one or two bloggers, who can't resist the urge to argue with idtios (trolls)... and so, the trolls keep coming back.
If you feed the trolls... you're not helping the blog. When I tell people that "I've handled it"... take my word for it... it's been handled. I don't need further "assistance".
Another applicable thought: If I really respect a person, and they've demonstrated intelligence and character... their words can effect me. I take their words to heart. But, if I know someone is a bozo... their opinion means nothing to me. Always consider the source, before reacting. (Also, one of Frank's points).
How anyone can allow a fool, to bother them to any great extent, is beyond me. As I always ask: "Who's dumber... the fool... or, the person arguing with the fool"??
"Less is More"
A great college lesson: Every semester, I worked (almost) full-time, and carried five courses. To lighten the load... I intentionally chose one course each semester, that I hoped would be kinda easy. I called it my "blow-off course".
This particular semester, I took an entry-level art class.
Anywho... We were doing this art project, which required glue. Literally, it was Elmer's glue.
I globbed a ton of glue on my pieces. The pieces were smearing around, and not adhering together, at all.
The professor came over... and with a 'dab" of glue... he attached two pieces effortlessly.
He looked at me, and said: "Son... sometimes in life, less is more... this is one of those times".
That art course was a gazillion years ago. I can still hear his words echoing in my ears today. His advice alone, was worth the price of admission to his class. My "blow-off class" had yielded one of life's greatest lessons.
"Less is More". It's so simple, yet almost Zen-like. Try it sometime.... you won't regret it.
I still haven't achieved the necessary self- discipline, to act on my old professor's advice at all times... but rest asuusred... I know he's right.
If you respond He'll know Hes hit a nerve and will go all out hitting You in the same spot over and over again until you completely lose your cool. But its a free Country,You can argue with him all You want but I promise You will not change Him. All You'll do is raise your own blood pressure a few points higher.
I understand your point Matt. But as usual there are two sides to the coin. The Col may be an ass but he is also highly knowledgeable and entertaining. A worthy foe so to speak. I don't mind going toe to toe with him every now and then. I wouldn't want to do it on a regular basis but a couple of times a year I enjoy calling him out on his offensiveness - especially when he does it to someone I like.
Look, Frank and I have a different perspective on what a blog is. That is all. I see a blog as a bar, like the one I bartended in for seven years in Austin, the Hole in The Wall. The Hole was full of characters. some brilliant, some just obnoxioius. All types. It feels to me like Frank sees a blog almost like a mosque - a place of higher learning and spiritual aspirations. That's cool, obviously. It's just not me. I am a honky tonk guy. Someone takes a swing at my friend, I join the fray. I am forever grateful to Lynyrd that he runs a place where everyone is served, up to a point. And it is Lynyrd's call, and only Lynyrd's call, what that point is. If someone like Kimchi or Frank want to change the point then they should dialogue directly with Lynyrd. He's earned that.
and sorry, but I think dismissing the Col as a "troll" is extremely shortsighted. Does he come here to irritate? Of course, that's his personality. But as I said, you can't ignore his understanding and passion about the TLB case. When the Col is inactive I honestly think the Manson blog world suffers. So I take his bad with his good, and when his "bad" gets excessive, I will confront him - just like I threw out hundreds of guys at the Hole for improper behavior.
For me Leary... it's all about "context". It's not how nasty a blogger becomes, which defines them as a 'troll", but rather, their motive and context.
If someone posts here regularly... makes several informative contributions throughout the year... and does legitimate research... they can get into a VERY heated TLB discussion (even argument) on my blog, and I'm cool with that. These types of folks are here (in my mind), to blog the topic of TLB, in earnest. They stay on-topic, and they're here for the good, as well as the bad. Bottom line: They invest themselves.
When an interloper blows-in off the street twice a year, just to criticize... that's not a legitimate contributor. Those folks are not here to earnestly blog with us, in good faith. They're not here to learn, or to teach. Their only purpose, is to instigate trouble. That's a troll, by my definition.
The folks who never have anything informative to say related to the case, and only show-up to discuss off-topic "drama"... those are trolls.
If a blogger can't pull up a chair, and defend their TLB points with us... they're a troll (and a coward). Any decent point, should withstand scrutiny. And, any worthwhile point, is worth debating. If someone's point is worth stating, they should be willing (and able) to defend it.
Or, as Frank said it best: "if you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen”
But Lynyrd, with all due respect, you know that most of the conflicts on this and other blogs have more to do with style than substance. More to do with personality than content. In a dialogue over on another blog I did say to the Col that everyone would be better off if he just stayed on his blog seemingly to irritate. But he would argue he has the right to go anywhere to defend his views - his main one these days being defending Bobby B. The Saint and AustinAnn got on his bad side by simply voicing their opinions and offering up certain damaging evidence against Bobby. And the battle was on.
I confess I have never understood exactly what a troll was - your definition is as good as I have heard. As I said before, I am just not big on "rules of behavior" or etiquitte dictums. In a honky tonk you are good until you get either violent or sick. Then you're gone.
The colonel isn't a Troll...He knows a lot of info and Hes been around for as long as i can remember. But getting into a personal argument with Him is a waste of time. Although it can be funny...If you're not the one arguing!
If someone's life is so lonely and empty that they feel the need to bully and cause trouble the best thing to do is to ignore them. By ignoring them you take the control away from them and bullying and trolling are just a desperate attempt to legitimize someone's self importance by controlling others. Simply ignore them. After a while they'll give up and go bother someone else. It's that simple. It works for me.
A ‘troll’ is generally considered to be someone who posts messages in an online forum that are gratuitously provocative and at best tangential to the topic being discussed, with the intention of either getting an emotional response out of other posters or simply disrupting the flow of conversation.
Example: a poster on this forum recently ‘accused’ both Katie and me of ‘lifting’ posts from another blog – in both cases untrue, and in any case extraneous insofar as the information concerned was in the public domain. Both Katie and I rose to the bait; silence would have been a better strategy.
Col Scott is not a troll, and I never wanted to imply he was. In fact I tried to make my comments as general as possible, but it seems I can’t stop other people’s inferences.
86 comments:
I'd like to thank the academy... LOL!
Seriously though...
Thanks Everyone!!
Congrats Lynyrd! You're the one who made this blog! :)
Congratulations all around!
300,000 hits. Spectacular.
With the great threads you've been sporting here no doubt it will be a half million soon.
Take Care
Hey check this out. I've never seen this video of Sharon:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DusGll6E5Mc
Remember when Kramer got the set of the Merv Griffin show? LOL.
Congrats Lynyrd. You got me hooked.
katie8753 said...
Hey check this out. I've never seen this video of Sharon:
Sure you have, Katie. You just reposted what is on Eviliz today.
Suze I honestly didn't know it was on your site. I got this on a Google alert this morning.
Sorry, I wasn't filching. :)
Suze said...
Sure you have, Katie. You just reposted what is on Eviliz today.
Like Evil Sleaze got the milkman story from somewhere and every other thing those p.o.s's post.
I cant believe Suze took her head out of Matts ass long enough to breathe muchless post on the LSB3 and when she does it's to attack Katie.
Hi Brian!!
What can I say? It's the nature of "the beast". LOL.
Maybe I should check all the sites before making any comments to make sure it hasn't already been made. LOL.
There are people who solve problems... and then... there are people who create problems.
Suze is a person who creates problems.
I can tell everyone for fact, that Katie did not get her link from the Eviliz blog.
March 14th, is this blog's second anniversary in operation.
In that time... we've never intentionally re-used threads from the Eviliz blog.
Yes... bloggers sometimes discuss Eviliz material in my comments section... which I frown upon, and try to discourage.
(I try to discourage it, for this very reason... it brings folks like Suze in the door).
But, as for intentionally using their material... it doesn't happen.
Matt (from Eviliz) is very well aware of this, and for the most part, we co-exist amicably.
Suze thinks she's helping Matt.
She's not.
All Suze is doing here, is creating problems and discord for Matt, over nothing.
Matt doesn't need Suze's help... take my word for it.
Matt can thank Suze, for wherever this headache now takes us.
Thank You Suze.
This is yet another, of your fabulous TLB contributuions.
Katie has forwarded the "google alert" (to me), where she found the video in question.
I have contacted Matt directly, concerning this issue.
It's an amazing accomplishment, Lynyrd. Given the subject matter has been beaten to death and the burnout of other Manson blogs, what you have done in keeping things fresh and lively is a real testimony to your creative mind.
And kudos to Katie. "the nature of the beast" is so true. You can't be a bartender and not expect to deal with drunken obnoxiousness. And you can't be a blogger and not expect to deal with irrational nastiness. Try a Red Sox blog if you want real nastiness.
Godfather,
Congratulations on achieving such level of respect from those who choose to honor your site....
Not bad for a bunch of inbred drunks, eh????
I first saw the video in question on Sharon Tate's facebook page several days ago. Just a FYI...
Thank You Francis.
I spoke to Matt directly, which is the only way to do business... and, it's a dead issue.
Thank You Leigh, Johnny, Doc, Leary and Consigliere Dilligaf!
This blog is fun, because folks like you, are here!!!
Fun? Ain't that what it's all about?
Great job Lynyrd and congrats on the 300,000.
Yes thanks to everyone for your support and contributions!! :)
Congrats, Lynyrd!
Congratulations on 300,000 hits!! I'm not really sure what a "hit" is, but as Clint Eastwood said, "I guess it's better than a poke in the eye with a pointy stick".
Last night on Star City Radio, Brian mentioned the musical group "The LaBianca's". Apparently, they are a duo, with the female member being "Lena Marquise". I did a bit of looking, and Lena describes herself as an "erotic artist". I found a vid of her on an "erotic" website called Redtube, I won't post a link here as it is very graphic. If anyone wants to see it, search a vid entitled "Solo Ritual by Lena Marquise". I'm nearly certain it's her as music by "The LaBicana's" is playing in the background. I would describe it as very "Mansonesque".
Finally, CieloDrive.com has uploaded an interview with Paul Crockett. It gives the date as being Oct. 3, 1969. I think the Barker raids were on Oct. 10 and 12. So I assume this audio was recorded about 1 week before the Barker raids. The audio is clear, Crockett mentions Watkins, Poston, Wildebush and Juan Flynn. I think he refers to Charlie as a "lunatic". It's worth a listen.
Thanks for the info Sunset! :)
Lynyrd, congrats on all the hard work. I enjoy your blog immensely.
Katie, way to ignore idiots!!
My mom always told me that the biggest insult you can give to someone is to ignore their existence. You turn the power dynamic that way. And smiling widely is another way to piss them off!! lol
Hi Bobby!
Thanks La De La! I agree! :)
Like I said folks... "Dead Issue".
You're not helping me, by discussing this situation further.
Stifle Ya-Selves.
Okey doke.
Bobby you're a sweety-heart. Don't worry you didn't miss anything worthy of not missing.
As the Bard said, "All's Well That Ends Well".
And St., you the MAN! There are mucho people in cyberspace who enjoy your comments, including me. Keep makin' em. :)
This blog rocks so much! Amazing info with amazing people: Lynyrd,Katie,Leary,Doc,Kimichi,St. And etc.
Ignore all the hate. And to those who bash people's opinions with extreme negativity, here's a friendly reminder: Fact is, no except good old Chuck, Katie,Leslie,Sadie,Tex,Linda and certain other family members perhaps know the REAL truth and everything
Even THAT can be debated. But stay awesome everyone!
Sunset I've listened to the group La Biancas and have to say, I don't really care for them. A little too out there for me I guess.
I'm going to listen to the Crockett interview when I get a chance. I'm sure it's interesting. Cielodrive.com ROCKS!
And just wanted to say I know Im new and you all might consider me a newb or whatever, the amount of intelligence and information is awesome!
I really think that Charlie is the only one who knows the real truth.
Not Tex, Sadie, Pat, Leslie, Bruce, Clem, Linda, Sandy, Lynn, Gypsy or any of the others. They were all pawns.
I think they were all fed what Charlie wanted them to know.
That old buzzard will go to his grave with the knowledge of what really happened.
And it doesn't matter how many interviews he gives, how many letters he writes, how many "friends" he makes or how many people he chooses to "confide in".
He will never allow us to know the truth. I think that is his little joke on all of us. A vestige that comes with the honor of senility.
Just my thoughts.
I feel a thread coming on......
LOL.
Congrats on 300,000.
katie8753 said...He will never allow us to know the truth. I think that is his little joke on all of us. A vestige that comes with the honor of senility
If He does know and isn't saying its not His joke on us its because snitching is frowned upon in the world He grew up in.
Matt, loved your video. You look like a guy who is easy going and laid back. A guy who emerged from 1968 into NOW. Sitting in a cushioned chair hanging from the ceiling like we had in the 60's. LOL.
Great stuff.
I do think Charlie knows the truth. And I don't think he's not revealing it because he's not a snitch. I think he's not revealing it because it's the only thing keeping him in the lime light. Once he reveals it, he'll be dropped like a bag of dirt by reporters and most bloggers alike.
It's his Raison d'être
Anyway, that's just my opinion.
I think I'll head to the bunkhouse. You guys are the best! Thanks for all your support, contributions, thoughts, comments and opinions.
All are appreciated! :)
G'Night Jugdish!
And they said you cats would never make it: that you'd fail in a blaze of ignominy, that you'd crash in humiliating failure, that you'd be in jail long before you'd hit 300K. Actually, it was just me saying those things and boy was I wrong!!! Congrats guys and onward to 1 billion hits.
Hey Stormsurge!!
It's ALWAYS great to see you!
Ya know... I was thinking the other day...
You're one of my favorite posters here... and, you've never said one thing about the case! LOL
It just goes to show ya... you can have good friends on these blogs, and never discuss TLB at all.
There was another blogger named "Alice" that came around for years.
She was a British lady, and funny as hell.
She never discussed the case with us, either... but, popped-in all the time, just to say hello.
I met her, long before this blog opened.
Ironically, her avatar was of a baby, as well.
Then one day, she just disappeared.
Sometimes, I still wonder what happened to "Baby Alice".
Hi Bob.
I wasn't referring to you.
Congratts LYNYRD, and may you have many many more "hits" as well!
xx Paulina
I also just wanna apologize if Im fairly new and not as sharp as anyone else. I've always been interested in the life of the Family, and it's been fairly recent that I've decided to take a closer look at the trial and motives. I can only hope my comments are appreciated!
Bobby I'm sorry you endured that crap at the Col's blog, but truth be told, if you will just stay away from there he can't hurt you or St. Circumstance.
If you guys will just not comment on this blog, he'll end up with 3 comments, and 2 of those will be his.
Let him argue with himself. You guys are both so special to me.
Please just stay out of harm's way. At the end of the day, your comments won't have the effect you want and you will be better off just laying off.
And as the great FrankM so greatly reflected and AFFECTED, along with the sweet, wispy, hard-knocks and violeted Scarlett O'Hara: ..Tomorrow is Another Day.
Hi Lauren, I like your posts. It's always nice to get a young college person's perspective. Keep it up.
Secretariat wins!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V18ui3Rtjz4
The only reason I show this video is because winners always win!
And LSB3.com is a WINNER!!
And I'm hoping that it's not a new thread on someone's blog.
Blush......LOL.
Okay again, I'm heading for the bunkhouse. LOL
G'Night again Jugdish.
Please don't wake me again. LOL.
The second part of the Paul Crockett police interview has been posted on Cielodrive.com.
Apparently, Crockett began talking to police officers near Barker around Sept. 29. and apparently had contact with them over the next few days. At some point, the police apparently tell Crockett to drive out of there in a Power Wagon if Charlie comes back up there. Crockett says he wouldn't drive out of there "for all the grits in Dixie". Crockett assumed Manson was watching the exits.
Crockett also mentioned "Tex". I think I read Watson fled Barker the day before the raid, so I guess that would be around Oct. 9.
At this time, I guess the police were investigating the arson on the earth mover, they probably had no idea of the connection to TLB at this time. Certainly, some people up in Barker knew about it, Manson, Watson, etc. but others didn't, or had only heard rumors, Crockett, Watkins, etc.
http://hughobrian.me/hughs-color-photo-album/hugh_obrian_a-2-49473/
Bobby I'm glad to know that.
Paulina!! Stormy!!
Thanks Sunset. I still haven't listened to that Crockett interview but will do so today.
Mr. P...."Look...it's Hugh O'Brian". HA HA.
Walking the dog in McGolrick Park today I found myself reflecting on recent posts here and in other Manson blogs. It’s not often that my Brooklyn life is disturbed by the Manson madness, but I was wondering why some people here seem to have got their underwear so screwed up just recently. When I came back in I sat down and typed up what was going through my mind.
You can think of the following as Frank’s Five Follies .
ONE: Don’t expect others to feel the way you do. Why should they? Pretty much for every post you make, someone, somewhere, is going to be upset by it. Most likely their right to post is the same as yours. Their arguments may be as strong to them as yours are to you. If you’re likely to get offended, then maybe you’re better off not posting. As the saying goes, ‘if you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen”.
TWO: The ONLY thing to do with trolls is to ignore them. If we all stopped feeding the trolls, the blogs we frequent would be less acrimonious places.
THREE: If you find yourself in a flaming match, just STOP. Don’t go on and on, explaining, justifying yourself. Most likely no one cares, anyway. We’re not real people here. Fortunately.
FOUR: Take time out to understand the Internet. Learn to identify socks and trolls. Learn poster’s styles. A long established poster is unlikely to suddenly change his/her posting style because you ask or want him to. Choose who you want to interact with. If someone winds you up, don’t reply to them, IGNORE them. It’ll better for you, and better for others on the blog.
FIVE: Finally, and feel free to disagree with this (most people seem to), post when you have something relevant to say that you think might be of interest or entertainment to others. Don’t feel obliged to express an opinion on anything and everything. The most respected posters here seem to be those who post infrequently, informedly, in a civil tone and stay on topic.
Have a good day, folks
FrankM
The Col is a miserable bully. plain and simple. Not worth anybody's consternation. I respond from time to time to his crap just for the mental exercise, but I am a million time happier interacting with Doc or Bobby or Lauren or Saint or a dozen others on these blogs.
Katie, I do have a slightly different twist on why Charlie doesn't come clean. I have shared it with Lynyrd but it is one of those 'shot in the dark' things. I think Charlie continues to distance himself from TLB because it invalidated him as a Prophet. The Black community barely reacted to TLB. I think Charlie still obsesses about achieving Prophet status down the road. Maybe there will be a race war someday in America. And of course the environment is going to tank so he will be right there. But as there were 5,000 higher credential environmental folk making the same forecast who care what a mass murderer says.
But I honestly do think Manson believes he is a unique individual and blessed with special gifts. He wants to be recognized for that so as such he cannot confess to such ineptitude as TLB.
That's just the way I feel.
carry on. I do think a party for Lynyrd is in order when LSB3 hits a half million.
I don't know, Frank. You are highly respected both here and elsewhere, but I never seem to understand exactly what you are saying.
I have always felt that blogs were places where people could vent and theorize within reason. No offense. but you come across as a bit of a purist who seems irritated with human nature. Of course when folk hold strong and opposite opinions they are going to clash. It is, as Katie said recently, 'the nature of the beast'.
You clearly aspire to a higher form of 'the beast'. More power to ya.
But, if on a thread about post counts, the lovely Katie offers up her opinion on why Charlie remains silent, then I am going to feel free to respond to that, even if it does offend your sense of internet etiquitte.
I fully expect that I qualify as one of your dreaded trolls, and honestly that doesn't faze me at all. Takes all types to make an interesting blog.
Frank thanks so much for taking the time to write down your thoughts. Much appreciated pristine advice from a revered colleague.
Leary I don't think that Frank was referring to anyone in particular. I think it more of a general view. :)
Leary you could be quite right in your assessment of the reason for Charlie's silence.
You know I was thinking, Charlie was big on "not snitching", but I think that he encouraged Sandy & Squeaky to "snitch" on everyone living at Spahn's or Barker's Ranch when he wasn't around, so that "the soul" would have all information and knowledge in order to appear to be "omnipotent".
yeah. I gotta slightly disagree Katie. I do think Frank was referring to the folk who clashed this weekend. And for some strange reason I feel the need to back up the Saint as well as defend myself. Weird, given our history. But I feel the Saint has really worked hard to be more professional and he deserves credit for that. And the Col is just a rightous ass. Sometimes you just gotta call a spade a spade.
Leary, Katie is quite right in that none of the above was written with you in mind (although if you feel the cap fits, …)
What follows, however, is directed at you with the aim of spelling out a little more clearly what I wanted to say in my previous post, although may interest others.
There is a concept known as ‘the cooperative principle’, which purports to describe human interactions. It comes from the work of a man called Paul Grice, and in his words consists of the injunction to "Make your contribution such as it is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged." [It sounds like an order but was intended to be a description].
Grice holds that if listeners and speakers aspire to mutually effective communication they must respect four ‘maxims’ which explain the relationship between what is said and what is understood.
These are:
• the ‘Maxim of Quality’ [Be Truthful; Do not say what you believe to be false. Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.]
• the ‘Maxim of Quantity’ [Quantity of Information; Make your contribution as informative as is required; Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.]
• the ‘Maxim of Relation’ [Relevance; Be relevant.]
• the ‘Maxim of Manner’ [Be Clear; Avoid obscurity of expression; Avoid ambiguity; Be brief; Be orderly.]
The failure of posters to respect these maxims is frequently seen here and in other blogs. This is the point I was wanting to make.
I've just never responded well to dictums, Frank.
But if these float your boat, as I said, more power to ya.
Always a pleasure.
>>>Leary said: But I feel the Saint has really worked hard to be more professional and he deserves credit for that. And the Col is just a rightous ass. Sometimes you just gotta call a spade a spade.>>>
I couldn't agree more. I think that you and St. Circumstance rocked this weekend. Kudos to you both!!
Franks five follies should be required reading for all Bloggers.
>>>Leary said: But I feel the Saint has really worked hard to be more professional and he deserves credit for that. And the Col is just a rightous ass. Sometimes you just gotta call a spade a spade
Thats exactly what He wants You to do.
The Col is a Professional button pusher.
Frank makes some very valid points.
Many times... (in fact, most times)... "less is more".
At times...
I'm guilty of giving too much credence to troublemakers myself.
I always regret it.
Troublemakers, are looking for attention.
It's as simple, as that.
They don't care if that attention is positive or negative.
If you fight with them... you're giving them exactly what they want.
By doing so, you're ensuring that they'll return.
Everyone likes to be heard.
If you ignore anyone enough times, they will eventually grow bored... feel powerless... and leave.
And eventually, they'll stop coming back altogether.
(One of Frank's points)
Problem is...
In a group this large... there's always one or two bloggers, who can't resist the urge to argue with idtios (trolls)... and so, the trolls keep coming back.
If you feed the trolls... you're not helping the blog.
When I tell people that "I've handled it"... take my word for it... it's been handled.
I don't need further "assistance".
Another applicable thought:
If I really respect a person, and they've demonstrated intelligence and character... their words can effect me.
I take their words to heart.
But, if I know someone is a bozo... their opinion means nothing to me.
Always consider the source, before reacting.
(Also, one of Frank's points).
How anyone can allow a fool, to bother them to any great extent, is beyond me.
As I always ask:
"Who's dumber... the fool... or, the person arguing with the fool"??
"Less is More"
A great college lesson:
Every semester, I worked (almost) full-time, and carried five courses.
To lighten the load... I intentionally chose one course each semester, that I hoped would be kinda easy.
I called it my "blow-off course".
This particular semester, I took an entry-level art class.
Anywho...
We were doing this art project, which required glue.
Literally, it was Elmer's glue.
I globbed a ton of glue on my pieces.
The pieces were smearing around, and not adhering together, at all.
The professor came over... and with a 'dab" of glue... he attached two pieces effortlessly.
He looked at me, and said:
"Son... sometimes in life, less is more... this is one of those times".
That art course was a gazillion years ago.
I can still hear his words echoing in my ears today.
His advice alone, was worth the price of admission to his class.
My "blow-off class" had yielded one of life's greatest lessons.
"Less is More".
It's so simple, yet almost Zen-like.
Try it sometime.... you won't regret it.
I still haven't achieved the necessary self- discipline, to act on my old professor's advice at all times... but rest asuusred... I know he's right.
If you respond He'll know Hes hit a nerve and will go all out hitting You in the same spot over and over again until you completely lose your cool.
But its a free Country,You can argue with him all You want but I promise You will not change Him.
All You'll do is raise your own blood pressure a few points higher.
Well, I'm good with Maxim #1. The rest I probably need to do some more work on. HA HA.
I understand your point Matt. But as usual there are two sides to the coin. The Col may be an ass but he is also highly knowledgeable and entertaining. A worthy foe so to speak. I don't mind going toe to toe with him every now and then. I wouldn't want to do it on a regular basis but a couple of times a year I enjoy calling him out on his offensiveness - especially when he does it to someone I like.
Look, Frank and I have a different perspective on what a blog is. That is all.
I see a blog as a bar, like the one I bartended in for seven years in Austin, the Hole in The Wall.
The Hole was full of characters. some brilliant, some just obnoxioius. All types.
It feels to me like Frank sees a blog almost like a mosque - a place of higher learning and spiritual aspirations.
That's cool, obviously. It's just not me. I am a honky tonk guy. Someone takes a swing at my friend, I join the fray.
I am forever grateful to Lynyrd that he runs a place where everyone is served, up to a point. And it is Lynyrd's call, and only Lynyrd's call, what that point is.
If someone like Kimchi or Frank want to change the point then they should dialogue directly with Lynyrd. He's earned that.
and sorry, but I think dismissing the Col as a "troll" is extremely shortsighted. Does he come here to irritate? Of course, that's his personality. But as I said, you can't ignore his understanding and passion about the TLB case. When the Col is inactive I honestly think the Manson blog world suffers. So I take his bad with his good, and when his "bad" gets excessive, I will confront him - just like I threw out hundreds of guys at the Hole for improper behavior.
Hi Leary,
I didn't have anyone particular in mind, when I posted my commentary.
I was speaking in general terms.
I can't speak fro Frank.
"I am rubber you are glue, everything you say, bounces off of me and sticks to you"--Michael Stivik
Hi Leary,
"Troll"
For me Leary... it's all about "context".
It's not how nasty a blogger becomes, which defines them as a 'troll", but rather, their motive and context.
If someone posts here regularly... makes several informative contributions throughout the year... and does legitimate research... they can get into a VERY heated TLB discussion (even argument) on my blog, and I'm cool with that.
These types of folks are here (in my mind), to blog the topic of TLB, in earnest.
They stay on-topic, and they're here for the good, as well as the bad.
Bottom line:
They invest themselves.
When an interloper blows-in off the street twice a year, just to criticize... that's not a legitimate contributor.
Those folks are not here to earnestly blog with us, in good faith.
They're not here to learn, or to teach.
Their only purpose, is to instigate trouble.
That's a troll, by my definition.
The folks who never have anything informative to say related to the case, and only show-up to discuss off-topic "drama"... those are trolls.
If a blogger can't pull up a chair, and defend their TLB points with us... they're a troll (and a coward).
Any decent point, should withstand scrutiny.
And, any worthwhile point, is worth debating.
If someone's point is worth stating, they should be willing (and able) to defend it.
Or, as Frank said it best:
"if you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen”
But Lynyrd, with all due respect, you know that most of the conflicts on this and other blogs have more to do with style than substance. More to do with personality than content.
In a dialogue over on another blog I did say to the Col that everyone would be better off if he just stayed on his blog seemingly to irritate. But he would argue he has the right to go anywhere to defend his views - his main one these days being defending Bobby B. The Saint and AustinAnn got on his bad side by simply voicing their opinions and offering up certain damaging evidence against Bobby. And the battle was on.
I confess I have never understood exactly what a troll was - your definition is as good as I have heard.
As I said before, I am just not big on "rules of behavior" or etiquitte dictums.
In a honky tonk you are good until you get either violent or sick. Then you're gone.
damn, meant to write "if he just stayed on his blog instead of coming to others seemingly just to irritate."
Hi Leary,
I think we're discussing two different topics here.
I'm discussing general tactics to minimize drama and disarm trolls... and you're discussing specific conflicts between bloggers, and the Colonel.
I don't consider the Colonel, to be a troll.
The colonel isn't a Troll...He knows a lot of info and Hes been around for as long as i can remember.
But getting into a personal argument with Him is a waste of time.
Although it can be funny...If you're not the one arguing!
I just want to reiterate what I posted before....
If someone's life is so lonely and empty that they feel the need to bully and cause trouble the best thing to do is to ignore them. By ignoring them you take the control away from them and bullying and trolling are just a desperate attempt to legitimize someone's self importance by controlling others. Simply ignore them. After a while they'll give up and go bother someone else. It's that simple. It works for me.
Leary
A ‘troll’ is generally considered to be someone who posts messages in an online forum that are gratuitously provocative and at best tangential to the topic being discussed, with the intention of either getting an emotional response out of other posters or simply disrupting the flow of conversation.
Example: a poster on this forum recently ‘accused’ both Katie and me of ‘lifting’ posts from another blog – in both cases untrue, and in any case extraneous insofar as the information concerned was in the public domain. Both Katie and I rose to the bait; silence would have been a better strategy.
Col Scott is not a troll, and I never wanted to imply he was. In fact I tried to make my comments as general as possible, but it seems I can’t stop other people’s inferences.
Then one day, she just disappeared.
Sometimes, I still wonder what happened to "Baby Alice".
Oh I'm still here, lurking about the place. I'm a very stealthy baby and you'd be amazed how many people don't notice me crawling around their feet. x
Ignore me - double post. It's tough typing with tiny fat fingers...
Look at the gorgeous baby!!!!
Alice... you ROCK!
I still love ya, after all these years. LOL
(Isn't that a song?)
Actually... I think the songs is, "still crazy after all these years". LOLOL!
BABY ALICE!!!
I thought I felt something crawling on my feet! LOL.
We've gotta get you and Stormy together! :)
Don't be a stranger!
This is a lot of hits. YAY!!!!!!!
Lynyrd: Congrats indeed! ^_^
sunset77: Thanks for the very appropriate personal mention on here.
Brian Davis: Thanks for mentioning The LaBiancas band on your show.
<3
Lena Marquise
Post a Comment