> Arguing is fun, but it can also be energy-sappingand deflecting.Marley


Great post, Marley. I agree with you, too. Lively debate is exhilirating for
most of the personalities who gather on usenet, I suspect. For me, the real
nastiness and the blows below the belt, ongoing spewing of bitterness can be a
real downer at times. But, we'd all have to admit to having *some* mysterious
needs met by usenet in its entirety. Otherwise, we'd disappear.


P2P

"Palms2pines" <palms2pines@aol.comh8spam> wrote in message
news:20040212113531.11652.00001692@mb-m12.aol.com... Arguing is fun, but it can also be energy-sappingand deflecting.Marley Great post, Marley. I agree with you, too. Lively debate is exhilirating
for most of the personalities who gather on usenet, I suspect. For me, the
real nastiness and the blows below the belt, ongoing spewing of bitterness can
be a real downer at times. But, we'd all have to admit to having *some*
mysterious needs met by usenet in its entirety. Otherwise, we'd disappear. P2P

I totally agree. You know, Bill brought civility to debate here, that is
often lacking, and it really helped me to frame certain arguments. I hate
the nastiness and pettiness that marks a fair amount of posts here
lately--on all sides. Sometimes I read them just to see how bad it can get.
I have to admit, though, that if it weren't for my "position" there's a
couple people I'd get real nasty with.

Marley

palms2pines@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines) wrote Great post, Marley. I agree with you, too. Lively debate is exhilirating for most of the personalities who gather on usenet, I suspect. For me, the real nastiness and the blows below the belt, ongoing spewing of bitterness can be a real downer at times. But, we'd all have to admit to having *some* mysterious needs met by usenet in its entirety. Otherwise, we'd disappear. P2P


I've got to say that I learn a lot from being here. Not just from the
calm, reasoned posts, but from the impassioned ones as well. Logic
isn't everything. While I'm not sure that personal sniping is a great
way to go, I think that the arguments aren't circular so much as
spiral.

I think it would be a lot less interesting if it were moderated.

Rupa

"Rupa Bose" <rkbose@pacific.net.sg> wrote in message
news:e5619372.0402122016.2125f979@posting.google.c om... palms2pines@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines) wrote Great post, Marley. I agree with you, too. Lively debate is exhilirating
for most of the personalities who gather on usenet, I suspect. For me, the
real nastiness and the blows below the belt, ongoing spewing of bitterness
can be a real downer at times. But, we'd all have to admit to having *some*
mysterious needs met by usenet in its entirety. Otherwise, we'd disappear. P2P I've got to say that I learn a lot from being here. Not just from the calm, reasoned posts, but from the impassioned ones as well. Logic isn't everything. While I'm not sure that personal sniping is a great way to go, I think that the arguments aren't circular so much as spiral.

A downward spiral?! I think it would be a lot less interesting if it were moderated. Rupa

Oh I agree. Nobody wants a moderated group. There was a modereated group
for awhile, and it's dead.

Marley

in article LfYWb.26947$fV5.582535@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, Marley
Greiner at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 4:19 am:
"Rupa Bose" <rkbose@pacific.net.sg> wrote in message news:e5619372.0402122016.2125f979@posting.google.c om... palms2pines@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines) wrote Great post, Marley. I agree with you, too. Lively debate is exhilirating for most of the personalities who gather on usenet, I suspect. For me, the real nastiness and the blows below the belt, ongoing spewing of bitterness can be a real downer at times. But, we'd all have to admit to having *some* mysterious needs met by usenet in its entirety. Otherwise, we'd disappear. P2P I've got to say that I learn a lot from being here. Not just from the calm, reasoned posts, but from the impassioned ones as well. Logic isn't everything. While I'm not sure that personal sniping is a great way to go, I think that the arguments aren't circular so much as spiral. A downward spiral?! I think it would be a lot less interesting if it were moderated. Rupa Oh I agree. Nobody wants a moderated group. There was a modereated group for awhile, and it's dead. Marley


Well there's always forum.adoption.com you can hang around over there for a
while then pop back over here and be as offensive as you please. Seems to
work for some people.

BTW I got my post kicked of there three times last night, they don't like
their policy criticised much do they.

Robin

"Robin Harritt" <karakoram@postadoption.info> wrote in message
news:BC52234B.33FC0%karakoram@postadoption.info... in article LfYWb.26947$fV5.582535@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net,
Marley Greiner at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 4:19 am: "Rupa Bose" <rkbose@pacific.net.sg> wrote in message news:e5619372.0402122016.2125f979@posting.google.c om... palms2pines@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines) wrote> Great post, Marley. I agree with you, too. Lively debate is
exhilirating for> most of the personalities who gather on usenet, I suspect. For me, the
real> nastiness and the blows below the belt, ongoing spewing of bitterness
can be> a real downer at times. But, we'd all have to admit to having *some*> mysterious needs met by usenet in its entirety. Otherwise, we'd
disappear.>>> P2P> I've got to say that I learn a lot from being here. Not just from the
calm, reasoned posts, but from the impassioned ones as well. Logic isn't everything. While I'm not sure that personal sniping is a great way to
go, I think that the arguments aren't circular so much as spiral. A downward spiral?! I think it would be a lot less interesting if it were moderated. Rupa Oh I agree. Nobody wants a moderated group. There was a modereated
group for awhile, and it's dead. Marley Well there's always forum.adoption.com you can hang around over there for
a while then pop back over here and be as offensive as you please. Seems to work for some people. BTW I got my post kicked of there three times last night, they don't like their policy criticised much do they. Robin

What in the world did you say? Weren't you grateful enough?

Marley

in article KL_Wb.13491$hR.391186@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, Marley
Greiner at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 7:10 am:

<snip>
Well there's always forum.adoption.com you can hang around over there for a while then pop back over here and be as offensive as you please. Seems to work for some people. BTW I got my post kicked of there three times last night, they don't like their policy criticised much do they. Robin What in the world did you say? Weren't you grateful enough? Marley


I commented on the unfairness and futility of the following:-

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++

New Policy To Be Effective Immediately (02-10-2004 until 03-12-2004)

NEW POLICY TO BE EFFECTIVELY IMMEDIATELY:
Adoption Media, LLC has implemented the following new policy.

Due to the occurrence of large numbers of harsh, and potentially slanderous
posts about adoption professionals, and the occurrence of large numbers of
self-serving advertising disguised as independent posts, all comments and
discussions about adoption facilitators, agencies, attorneys, searchers and
other adoption professionals, whether positive or negative, MAY NOT BE
POSTED ON ADOPTION FORUMS. If individuals desire to provide or exchange this
kind of information, it will need to be done privately and by other means,
such as through private messaging and emails.

If you are seeking information about a particular adoption professional, it
is acceptable to post a message that you are seeking information about the
experiences of others with that specific adoption professional, along with a
request that others may provide that information to you in a personal
message or email sent to your personal account.

It will also be acceptable to post a message that you have experience with a
particular adoption professional (WITHOUT GIVING ANY DETAILS) and that you
can be contacted on a private basis, at a specific location, for more
information.

ANYONE THAT VIOLATES THIS NEW POLICY MAY BE PERMANENTLY BANNED FROM FORUMS
WITHOUT NOTICE.

This change has become necessary because there isn¹t any way to determine
the truthfulness of either positive or negative information that can be
posted on forums on an anonymous basis. So it would be equally unfair to
erase, or to allow the uncontrolled posting of either. Under the new policy,
if an individual is certain that the information to be shared is true, and
can be documented, then they will still have the ability to share that
information on a private basis.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++

Once my response had been removed a third time without comment, I decided to
put the new policy to the test and gave Barnardos a jolly good slaging off.
That seems to have been perfectly acceptable. It must be only American
adoption agencies that are beyond reproach.


Robin

"Robin Harritt" <karakoram@postadoption.info> wrote in message
news:BC524BDE.33FC9%karakoram@postadoption.info... in article KL_Wb.13491$hR.391186@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net,
Marley Greiner at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 7:10 am: <snip> Well there's always forum.adoption.com you can hang around over there
for a while then pop back over here and be as offensive as you please. Seems
to work for some people. BTW I got my post kicked of there three times last night, they don't
like their policy criticised much do they. Robin What in the world did you say? Weren't you grateful enough? Marley I commented on the unfairness and futility of the following:- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++ New Policy To Be Effective Immediately (02-10-2004 until 03-12-2004) NEW POLICY TO BE EFFECTIVELY IMMEDIATELY: Adoption Media, LLC has implemented the following new policy. Due to the occurrence of large numbers of harsh, and potentially
slanderous posts about adoption professionals, and the occurrence of large numbers of self-serving advertising disguised as independent posts, all comments and discussions about adoption facilitators, agencies, attorneys, searchers
and other adoption professionals, whether positive or negative, MAY NOT BE POSTED ON ADOPTION FORUMS. If individuals desire to provide or exchange
this kind of information, it will need to be done privately and by other means, such as through private messaging and emails. If you are seeking information about a particular adoption professional,
it is acceptable to post a message that you are seeking information about the experiences of others with that specific adoption professional, along with
a request that others may provide that information to you in a personal message or email sent to your personal account. It will also be acceptable to post a message that you have experience with
a particular adoption professional (WITHOUT GIVING ANY DETAILS) and that you can be contacted on a private basis, at a specific location, for more information. ANYONE THAT VIOLATES THIS NEW POLICY MAY BE PERMANENTLY BANNED FROM FORUMS WITHOUT NOTICE. This change has become necessary because there isn¹t any way to determine the truthfulness of either positive or negative information that can be posted on forums on an anonymous basis. So it would be equally unfair to erase, or to allow the uncontrolled posting of either. Under the new
policy, if an individual is certain that the information to be shared is true, and can be documented, then they will still have the ability to share that information on a private basis. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++ Once my response had been removed a third time without comment, I decided
to put the new policy to the test and gave Barnardos a jolly good slaging
off. That seems to have been perfectly acceptable. It must be only American adoption agencies that are beyond reproach. Robin

Maybe they thought you were writing about Bretano's--the book store.

Marley

in article 166Xb.29852$fV5.633258@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, Marley
Greiner at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 3:32 pm:
"Robin Harritt" <karakoram@postadoption.info> wrote in message news:BC524BDE.33FC9%karakoram@postadoption.info... in article KL_Wb.13491$hR.391186@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, Marley Greiner at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 7:10 am: <snip>> Well there's always forum.adoption.com you can hang around over there for a> while then pop back over here and be as offensive as you please. Seems to> work for some people.>> BTW I got my post kicked of there three times last night, they don't like> their policy criticised much do they.>> Robin> What in the world did you say? Weren't you grateful enough? Marley I commented on the unfairness and futility of the following:- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++ New Policy To Be Effective Immediately (02-10-2004 until 03-12-2004) NEW POLICY TO BE EFFECTIVELY IMMEDIATELY: Adoption Media, LLC has implemented the following new policy. Due to the occurrence of large numbers of harsh, and potentially slanderous posts about adoption professionals, and the occurrence of large numbers of self-serving advertising disguised as independent posts, all comments and discussions about adoption facilitators, agencies, attorneys, searchers and other adoption professionals, whether positive or negative, MAY NOT BE POSTED ON ADOPTION FORUMS. If individuals desire to provide or exchange this kind of information, it will need to be done privately and by other means, such as through private messaging and emails. If you are seeking information about a particular adoption professional, it is acceptable to post a message that you are seeking information about the experiences of others with that specific adoption professional, along with a request that others may provide that information to you in a personal message or email sent to your personal account. It will also be acceptable to post a message that you have experience with a particular adoption professional (WITHOUT GIVING ANY DETAILS) and that you can be contacted on a private basis, at a specific location, for more information. ANYONE THAT VIOLATES THIS NEW POLICY MAY BE PERMANENTLY BANNED FROM FORUMS WITHOUT NOTICE. This change has become necessary because there isn¹t any way to determine the truthfulness of either positive or negative information that can be posted on forums on an anonymous basis. So it would be equally unfair to erase, or to allow the uncontrolled posting of either. Under the new policy, if an individual is certain that the information to be shared is true, and can be documented, then they will still have the ability to share that information on a private basis. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++ Once my response had been removed a third time without comment, I decided to put the new policy to the test and gave Barnardos a jolly good slaging off. That seems to have been perfectly acceptable. It must be only American adoption agencies that are beyond reproach. Robin Maybe they thought you were writing about Bretano's--the book store. Marley

Some guy once wrote to me after reading one of my pieces about Barnardo's
on another NG and said, "how wonderful it must have been being adopted in
Barbados". So I'm never really sure if I'm making myself understood!

Robin

"Robin Harritt" <karakoram@postadoption.info> wrote in message
news:BC52BC70.34148%karakoram@postadoption.info... in article 166Xb.29852$fV5.633258@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net,
Marley Greiner at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 3:32 pm: "Robin Harritt" <karakoram@postadoption.info> wrote in message news:BC524BDE.33FC9%karakoram@postadoption.info... in article KL_Wb.13491$hR.391186@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, Marley Greiner
at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 7:10 am: <snip>>> Well there's always forum.adoption.com you can hang around over there
for a>> while then pop back over here and be as offensive as you please.
Seems to>> work for some people.>>>> BTW I got my post kicked of there three times last night, they don't
like>> their policy criticised much do they.>>>> Robin>>> What in the world did you say? Weren't you grateful enough?>> Marley> I commented on the unfairness and futility of the following:- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++ New Policy To Be Effective Immediately (02-10-2004 until 03-12-2004) NEW POLICY TO BE EFFECTIVELY IMMEDIATELY: Adoption Media, LLC has
implemented the following new policy. Due to the occurrence of large numbers of harsh, and potentially
slanderous posts about adoption professionals, and the occurrence of large numbers
of self-serving advertising disguised as independent posts, all comments
and discussions about adoption facilitators, agencies, attorneys, searchers
and other adoption professionals, whether positive or negative, MAY NOT BE
POSTED ON ADOPTION FORUMS. If individuals desire to provide or exchange this
kind of information, it will need to be done privately and by other means, such
as through private messaging and emails. If you are seeking information about a particular adoption
professional, it is acceptable to post a message that you are seeking information about
the experiences of others with that specific adoption professional, along
with a request that others may provide that information to you in a personal
message or email sent to your personal account. It will also be acceptable to post a message that you have experience
with a particular adoption professional (WITHOUT GIVING ANY DETAILS) and that
you can be contacted on a private basis, at a specific location, for more information. ANYONE THAT VIOLATES THIS NEW POLICY MAY BE PERMANENTLY BANNED FROM
FORUMS WITHOUT NOTICE. This change has become necessary because there isn¹t any way to
determine the truthfulness of either positive or negative information that can be
posted on forums on an anonymous basis. So it would be equally unfair to erase,
or to allow the uncontrolled posting of either. Under the new policy, if an individual is certain that the information to be shared is true, and
can be documented, then they will still have the ability to share that
information on a private basis. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++ Once my response had been removed a third time without comment, I
decided to put the new policy to the test and gave Barnardos a jolly good slaging
off. That seems to have been perfectly acceptable. It must be only American adoption agencies that are beyond reproach. Robin Maybe they thought you were writing about Bretano's--the book store. Marley Some guy once wrote to me after reading one of my pieces about Barnardo's on another NG and said, "how wonderful it must have been being adopted in Barbados". So I'm never really sure if I'm making myself understood! Robin

Well..was it?

BTW, I've been meaning to mention that I read Patricia Cornwell's book on
Jack the Ripper and she gives a much more solid argument that appeared in
excerpt in Vanity Fair. I'd dismissed Sickert 25 years ago or more as Saucy
Jack, but I now think it's a good bet. I still don't understand, though,
and she really didn't address it, why the press slagged him off after Mary
Kellly's murder. There were certainly more killings after that one, though
perhaps not as brutal. The whole thing smacks of cover-up--not necessarily
of the perpetrator, but of police ineptitude maybe. Whether Sicket was Jack,
or not, he come across as a pretty despicable person, however.

I must admit I'm still taken with the idea that it was Leslie Stephens--just
for the fun factor of the Virginia Woolf connection.

Marley

in article Y58Xb.30457$fV5.644653@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, Marley
Greiner at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 5:48 pm:
"Robin Harritt" <karakoram@postadoption.info> wrote in message news:BC52BC70.34148%karakoram@postadoption.info... in article 166Xb.29852$fV5.633258@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, Marley Greiner at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 3:32 pm: "Robin Harritt" <karakoram@postadoption.info> wrote in message news:BC524BDE.33FC9%karakoram@postadoption.info... in article KL_Wb.13491$hR.391186@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, Marley Greiner at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 7:10 am:> <snip>>>>> Well there's always forum.adoption.com you can hang around over there for a>>> while then pop back over here and be as offensive as you please. Seems to>>> work for some people.>>>>>> BTW I got my post kicked of there three times last night, they don't like>>> their policy criticised much do they.>>>>>> Robin>>>>> What in the world did you say? Weren't you grateful enough?>>>> Marley>>>> I commented on the unfairness and futility of the following:->> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++>> New Policy To Be Effective Immediately (02-10-2004 until 03-12-2004)>> NEW POLICY TO BE EFFECTIVELY IMMEDIATELY: Adoption Media, LLC has implemented> the following new policy.>> Due to the occurrence of large numbers of harsh, and potentially slanderous> posts about adoption professionals, and the occurrence of large numbers of> self-serving advertising disguised as independent posts, all comments and> discussions about adoption facilitators, agencies, attorneys, searchers and> other adoption professionals, whether positive or negative, MAY NOT BE POSTED> ON ADOPTION FORUMS. If individuals desire to provide or exchange this kind of> information, it will need to be done privately and by other means, such as> through private messaging and emails.>> If you are seeking information about a particular adoption professional, it> is acceptable to post a message that you are seeking information about the> experiences of others with that specific adoption professional, along with a> request that others may provide that information to you in a personal message> or email sent to your personal account.>> It will also be acceptable to post a message that you have experience with a> particular adoption professional (WITHOUT GIVING ANY DETAILS) and that you> can be contacted on a private basis, at a specific location, for more> information.>> ANYONE THAT VIOLATES THIS NEW POLICY MAY BE PERMANENTLY BANNED FROM FORUMS> WITHOUT NOTICE.>> This change has become necessary because there isn't any way to determine the> truthfulness of either positive or negative information that can be posted on> forums on an anonymous basis. So it would be equally unfair to erase, or to> allow the uncontrolled posting of either. Under the new policy, if an> individual is certain that the information to be shared is true, and can be> documented, then they will still have the ability to share that information> on a private basis.>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++>> Once my response had been removed a third time without comment, I decided to> put the new policy to the test and gave Barnardos a jolly good slaging off.> That seems to have been perfectly acceptable. It must be only American> adoption agencies that are beyond reproach.>>> Robin> Maybe they thought you were writing about Bretano's--the book store. Marley Some guy once wrote to me after reading one of my pieces about Barnardo's on another NG and said, "how wonderful it must have been being adopted in Barbados". So I'm never really sure if I'm making myself understood! Robin Well..was it? BTW, I've been meaning to mention that I read Patricia Cornwell's book on Jack the Ripper and she gives a much more solid argument that appeared in excerpt in Vanity Fair. I'd dismissed Sickert 25 years ago or more as Saucy Jack, but I now think it's a good bet. I still don't understand, though, and she really didn't address it, why the press slagged him off after Mary Kellly's murder. There were certainly more killings after that one, though perhaps not as brutal. The whole thing smacks of cover-up--not necessarily of the perpetrator, but of police ineptitude maybe. Whether Sicket was Jack, or not, he come across as a pretty despicable person, however. I must admit I'm still taken with the idea that it was Leslie Stephens--just for the fun factor of the Virginia Woolf connection. Marley

I know that Ms Cornwall has spent an absolute fortune on expensive
retrospective forensic work and this is not going to be very popular. But
I'm still putting my money on Thomas John Barnardo, that well know Irish
émigré who frequented the nights in old Whitechapel. How better could he
have learned the back streets of London's east end than on his sorties after
boys. I know some have said that it could not have been he, as our Thomas
was but a rather a short little gentleman who would hardly have been able to
reach up high enough to effect strangulation. But I have my own theory,
which is that TJ Barnardo esq. was the first man in London to possess one
the newfangled lightweight portable aluminium stepladders imported specially
for him from the Americas. Now if could only find those steps and the blood
still encrusted upon them, why I'd soon be as wealthy as Ms Cornwell.


Robin

"Robin Harritt" <karakoram@postadoption.info> wrote in message
news:BC52DC8F.34160%karakoram@postadoption.info... in article Y58Xb.30457$fV5.644653@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net,
Marley Greiner at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 5:48 pm: "Robin Harritt" <karakoram@postadoption.info> wrote in message news:BC52BC70.34148%karakoram@postadoption.info... in article 166Xb.29852$fV5.633258@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, Marley Greiner at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 3:32 pm:>> "Robin Harritt" <karakoram@postadoption.info> wrote in message> news:BC524BDE.33FC9%karakoram@postadoption.info... in article> KL_Wb.13491$hR.391186@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, Marley
Greiner at> maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 7:10 am:>>> <snip>>>>>>> Well there's always forum.adoption.com you can hang around over
there for a>>>> while then pop back over here and be as offensive as you please. Seems to>>>> work for some people.>>>>>>>> BTW I got my post kicked of there three times last night, they
don't like>>>> their policy criticised much do they.>>>>>>>> Robin>>>>>>> What in the world did you say? Weren't you grateful enough?>>>>>> Marley>>>>>>> I commented on the unfairness and futility of the following:->>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++>>>> New Policy To Be Effective Immediately (02-10-2004 until 03-12-2004)>>>> NEW POLICY TO BE EFFECTIVELY IMMEDIATELY: Adoption Media, LLC has implemented>> the following new policy.>>>> Due to the occurrence of large numbers of harsh, and potentially slanderous>> posts about adoption professionals, and the occurrence of large
numbers of>> self-serving advertising disguised as independent posts, all comments and>> discussions about adoption facilitators, agencies, attorneys,
searchers and>> other adoption professionals, whether positive or negative, MAY NOT
BE POSTED>> ON ADOPTION FORUMS. If individuals desire to provide or exchange this kind of>> information, it will need to be done privately and by other means,
such as>> through private messaging and emails.>>>> If you are seeking information about a particular adoption professional, it>> is acceptable to post a message that you are seeking information
about the>> experiences of others with that specific adoption professional, along with a>> request that others may provide that information to you in a personal message>> or email sent to your personal account.>>>> It will also be acceptable to post a message that you have experience with a>> particular adoption professional (WITHOUT GIVING ANY DETAILS) and
that you>> can be contacted on a private basis, at a specific location, for more>> information.>>>> ANYONE THAT VIOLATES THIS NEW POLICY MAY BE PERMANENTLY BANNED FROM FORUMS>> WITHOUT NOTICE.>>>> This change has become necessary because there isn't any way to determine the>> truthfulness of either positive or negative information that can be posted on>> forums on an anonymous basis. So it would be equally unfair to erase, or to>> allow the uncontrolled posting of either. Under the new policy, if an>> individual is certain that the information to be shared is true, and can be>> documented, then they will still have the ability to share that information>> on a private basis.>>>>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++>>>> Once my response had been removed a third time without comment, I decided to>> put the new policy to the test and gave Barnardos a jolly good
slaging off.>> That seems to have been perfectly acceptable. It must be only
American>> adoption agencies that are beyond reproach.>>>>>> Robin>>> Maybe they thought you were writing about Bretano's--the book store.>> Marley Some guy once wrote to me after reading one of my pieces about
Barnardo's on another NG and said, "how wonderful it must have been being adopted
in Barbados". So I'm never really sure if I'm making myself understood! Robin Well..was it? BTW, I've been meaning to mention that I read Patricia Cornwell's book
on Jack the Ripper and she gives a much more solid argument that appeared
in excerpt in Vanity Fair. I'd dismissed Sickert 25 years ago or more as
Saucy Jack, but I now think it's a good bet. I still don't understand,
though, and she really didn't address it, why the press slagged him off after
Mary Kellly's murder. There were certainly more killings after that one,
though perhaps not as brutal. The whole thing smacks of cover-up--not
necessarily of the perpetrator, but of police ineptitude maybe. Whether Sicket was
Jack, or not, he come across as a pretty despicable person, however. I must admit I'm still taken with the idea that it was Leslie
Stephens--just for the fun factor of the Virginia Woolf connection. Marley I know that Ms Cornwall has spent an absolute fortune on expensive retrospective forensic work and this is not going to be very popular. But I'm still putting my money on Thomas John Barnardo, that well know Irish émigré who frequented the nights in old Whitechapel. How better could he have learned the back streets of London's east end than on his sorties
after boys. I know some have said that it could not have been he, as our Thomas was but a rather a short little gentleman who would hardly have been able
to reach up high enough to effect strangulation. But I have my own theory, which is that TJ Barnardo esq. was the first man in London to possess one the newfangled lightweight portable aluminium stepladders imported
specially for him from the Americas. Now if could only find those steps and the
blood still encrusted upon them, why I'd soon be as wealthy as Ms Cornwell. Robin

Last time I spentn any appreciable time in London there was a Jack the
Ripper walking tour I wanted to take, but I had a problem locating where it
started. I also couldn't find the cemetery Karlm Marx is buried in. I
must be more patient.

Marley

in article U3bXb.15442$hR.450667@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, Marley
Greiner at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 9:11 pm:
"Robin Harritt" <karakoram@postadoption.info> wrote in message news:BC52DC8F.34160%karakoram@postadoption.info... in article Y58Xb.30457$fV5.644653@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, Marley Greiner at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 5:48 pm: "Robin Harritt" <karakoram@postadoption.info> wrote in message news:BC52BC70.34148%karakoram@postadoption.info... in article 166Xb.29852$fV5.633258@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, Marley Greiner at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 3:32 pm:>>>> "Robin Harritt" <karakoram@postadoption.info> wrote in message>> news:BC524BDE.33FC9%karakoram@postadoption.info... in article>> KL_Wb.13491$hR.391186@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, Marley Greiner>> at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 7:10 am:>>>>> <snip>>>>>>>>> Well there's always forum.adoption.com you can hang around over there>>>>> for a while then pop back over here and be as offensive as you please.>>>>> Seems to work for some people.>>>>>>>>>> BTW I got my post kicked of there three times last night, they don't>>>>> like their policy criticised much do they.>>>>>>>>>> Robin>>>>>>>>> What in the world did you say? Weren't you grateful enough?>>>>>>>> Marley>>>>>>>>>> I commented on the unfairness and futility of the following:->>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++>>>>>> New Policy To Be Effective Immediately (02-10-2004 until 03-12-2004)>>>>>> NEW POLICY TO BE EFFECTIVELY IMMEDIATELY: Adoption Media, LLC has>>> implemented the following new policy.>>>>>> Due to the occurrence of large numbers of harsh, and potentially>>> slanderous posts about adoption professionals, and the occurrence of>>> large numbers of self-serving advertising disguised as independent posts,>>> all comments and discussions about adoption facilitators, agencies,>>> attorneys, searchers and other adoption professionals, whether positive>>> or negative, MAY NOT BE POSTED ON ADOPTION FORUMS. If individuals desire>>> to provide or exchange this kind of information, it will need to be done>>> privately and by other means, such as through private messaging and>>> emails.>>>>>> If you are seeking information about a particular adoption professional,>>> it is acceptable to post a message that you are seeking information about>>> the experiences of others with that specific adoption professional, along>>> with a request that others may provide that information to you in a>>> personal message or email sent to your personal account.>>>>>> It will also be acceptable to post a message that you have experience>>> with a particular adoption professional (WITHOUT GIVING ANY DETAILS) and>>> that you can be contacted on a private basis, at a specific location, for>>> more information.>>>>>> ANYONE THAT VIOLATES THIS NEW POLICY MAY BE PERMANENTLY BANNED FROM>>> FORUMS WITHOUT NOTICE.>>>>>> This change has become necessary because there isn't any way to determine>>> the truthfulness of either positive or negative information that can be>>> posted on forums on an anonymous basis. So it would be equally unfair to>>> erase, or to allow the uncontrolled posting of either. Under the new>>> policy, if an individual is certain that the information to be shared is>>> true, and can be documented, then they will still have the ability to>>> share that information on a private basis.>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++>>> Once my response had been removed a third time without comment, I decided>>> to put the new policy to the test and gave Barnardos a jolly good slaging>>> off. That seems to have been perfectly acceptable. It must be only>>> American adoption agencies that are beyond reproach.>>>>>>>>> Robin>>>>> Maybe they thought you were writing about Bretano's--the book store.>>>> Marley>>> Some guy once wrote to me after reading one of my pieces about Barnardo's> on another NG and said, "how wonderful it must have been being adopted in> Barbados". So I'm never really sure if I'm making myself understood!>> Robin> Well..was it? BTW, I've been meaning to mention that I read Patricia Cornwell's book on Jack the Ripper and she gives a much more solid argument that appeared in excerpt in Vanity Fair. I'd dismissed Sickert 25 years ago or more as Saucy Jack, but I now think it's a good bet. I still don't understand, though, and she really didn't address it, why the press slagged him off after Mary Kellly's murder. There were certainly more killings after that one, though perhaps not as brutal. The whole thing smacks of cover-up--not necessarily of the perpetrator, but of police ineptitude maybe. Whether Sicket was Jack, or not, he come across as a pretty despicable person, however. I must admit I'm still taken with the idea that it was Leslie Stephens--just for the fun factor of the Virginia Woolf connection. Marley I know that Ms Cornwall has spent an absolute fortune on expensive retrospective forensic work and this is not going to be very popular. But I'm still putting my money on Thomas John Barnardo, that well know Irish émigré who frequented the nights in old Whitechapel. How better could he have learned the back streets of London's east end than on his sorties after boys. I know some have said that it could not have been he, as our Thomas was but a rather a short little gentleman who would hardly have been able to reach up high enough to effect strangulation. But I have my own theory, which is that TJ Barnardo esq. was the first man in London to possess one the newfangled lightweight portable aluminium stepladders imported specially for him from the Americas. Now if could only find those steps and the blood still encrusted upon them, why I'd soon be as wealthy as Ms Cornwell. Robin

Last time I spentn any appreciable time in London there was a Jack the Ripper walking tour I wanted to take, but I had a problem locating where it started.

Was it proper organised one, or was it one those tours that starts wherever
there aren't any London bobbies around to see?
I also couldn't find the cemetery Karlm Marx is buried in. I must be more patient. Marley

Once you find Highgate you can't miss it, what ever was the champion of the
proletariat doing getting himself buried in that monstrosity? (mind you they
did always say Engles did all the real work)


Robin

In article <Y58Xb.30457$fV5.644653@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
Marley Greiner <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:BTW, I've been meaning to mention that I read Patricia Cornwell's book onJack the Ripper and she gives a much more solid argument that appeared inexcerpt in Vanity Fair. I'd dismissed Sickert 25 years ago or more as Saucy


Speaking of mass murderers, I just read a wonderful explaination of how
the Lizzie Borden murders make perfect sense if you understand WASP
folkways.

You have branches of the Borden family "not speaking" to one another for
years. You have rival churches in the twon "not speaking" to one another
for years. The tension builds and builds, and instead of having words
with your father and stepmother, you go ape and hit them over the head
with an axe.

I heartily reccomend the book King, Florence _Oh Wasp Where is thy
Sting_

Linda

"Robin Harritt" <karakoram@postadoption.info> wrote in message
news:BC52F206.342E9%karakoram@postadoption.info... in article U3bXb.15442$hR.450667@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net,
Marley Greiner at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 9:11 pm: "Robin Harritt" <karakoram@postadoption.info> wrote in message news:BC52DC8F.34160%karakoram@postadoption.info... in article Y58Xb.30457$fV5.644653@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, Marley
Greiner at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 5:48 pm:>> "Robin Harritt" <karakoram@postadoption.info> wrote in message> news:BC52BC70.34148%karakoram@postadoption.info... in article> 166Xb.29852$fV5.633258@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, Marley
Greiner at> maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 3:32 pm:>>>>>>> "Robin Harritt" <karakoram@postadoption.info> wrote in message>>> news:BC524BDE.33FC9%karakoram@postadoption.info... in article>>> KL_Wb.13491$hR.391186@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, Marley
Greiner>>> at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 7:10 am:>>>>>>> <snip>>>>>>>>>>> Well there's always forum.adoption.com you can hang around over
there>>>>>> for a while then pop back over here and be as offensive as you
please.>>>>>> Seems to work for some people.>>>>>>>>>>>> BTW I got my post kicked of there three times last night, they
don't>>>>>> like their policy criticised much do they.>>>>>>>>>>>> Robin>>>>>>>>>>> What in the world did you say? Weren't you grateful enough?>>>>>>>>>> Marley>>>>>>>>>>>>> I commented on the unfairness and futility of the following:->>>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++>>>>>>>> New Policy To Be Effective Immediately (02-10-2004 until
03-12-2004)>>>>>>>> NEW POLICY TO BE EFFECTIVELY IMMEDIATELY: Adoption Media, LLC has>>>> implemented the following new policy.>>>>>>>> Due to the occurrence of large numbers of harsh, and potentially>>>> slanderous posts about adoption professionals, and the occurrence
of>>>> large numbers of self-serving advertising disguised as independent
posts,>>>> all comments and discussions about adoption facilitators, agencies,>>>> attorneys, searchers and other adoption professionals, whether
positive>>>> or negative, MAY NOT BE POSTED ON ADOPTION FORUMS. If individuals
desire>>>> to provide or exchange this kind of information, it will need to be
done>>>> privately and by other means, such as through private messaging and>>>> emails.>>>>>>>> If you are seeking information about a particular adoption
professional,>>>> it is acceptable to post a message that you are seeking information
about>>>> the experiences of others with that specific adoption professional,
along>>>> with a request that others may provide that information to you in a>>>> personal message or email sent to your personal account.>>>>>>>> It will also be acceptable to post a message that you have
experience>>>> with a particular adoption professional (WITHOUT GIVING ANY
DETAILS) and>>>> that you can be contacted on a private basis, at a specific
location, for>>>> more information.>>>>>>>> ANYONE THAT VIOLATES THIS NEW POLICY MAY BE PERMANENTLY BANNED FROM>>>> FORUMS WITHOUT NOTICE.>>>>>>>> This change has become necessary because there isn't any way to
determine>>>> the truthfulness of either positive or negative information that
can be>>>> posted on forums on an anonymous basis. So it would be equally
unfair to>>>> erase, or to allow the uncontrolled posting of either. Under the
new>>>> policy, if an individual is certain that the information to be
shared is>>>> true, and can be documented, then they will still have the ability
to>>>> share that information on a private basis.>>>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++>>>> Once my response had been removed a third time without comment, I
decided>>>> to put the new policy to the test and gave Barnardos a jolly good
slaging>>>> off. That seems to have been perfectly acceptable. It must be only>>>> American adoption agencies that are beyond reproach.>>>>>>>>>>>> Robin>>>>>>> Maybe they thought you were writing about Bretano's--the book store.>>>>>> Marley>>>>> Some guy once wrote to me after reading one of my pieces about
Barnardo's>> on another NG and said, "how wonderful it must have been being
adopted in>> Barbados". So I'm never really sure if I'm making myself understood!>>>> Robin>>> Well..was it?>> BTW, I've been meaning to mention that I read Patricia Cornwell's book
on> Jack the Ripper and she gives a much more solid argument that appeared
in> excerpt in Vanity Fair. I'd dismissed Sickert 25 years ago or more as
Saucy> Jack, but I now think it's a good bet. I still don't understand,
though,> and she really didn't address it, why the press slagged him off after
Mary> Kellly's murder. There were certainly more killings after that one,
though> perhaps not as brutal. The whole thing smacks of cover-up--not
necessarily> of the perpetrator, but of police ineptitude maybe. Whether Sicket was
Jack,> or not, he come across as a pretty despicable person, however.>> I must admit I'm still taken with the idea that it was Leslie
Stephens--just> for the fun factor of the Virginia Woolf connection.>> Marley> I know that Ms Cornwall has spent an absolute fortune on expensive retrospective forensic work and this is not going to be very popular.
But I'm still putting my money on Thomas John Barnardo, that well know Irish
émigré who frequented the nights in old Whitechapel. How better could he have learned the back streets of London's east end than on his sorties after
boys. I know some have said that it could not have been he, as our Thomas was
but a rather a short little gentleman who would hardly have been able to
reach up high enough to effect strangulation. But I have my own theory, which is
that TJ Barnardo esq. was the first man in London to possess one the
newfangled lightweight portable aluminium stepladders imported specially for him
from the Americas. Now if could only find those steps and the blood still encrusted upon them, why I'd soon be as wealthy as Ms Cornwell. Robin Last time I spentn any appreciable time in London there was a Jack the
Ripper walking tour I wanted to take, but I had a problem locating where it
started. Was it proper organised one, or was it one those tours that starts
wherever there aren't any London bobbies around to see?

I think it was a proper organized tour. It was advertised in...hmmmmm, I
can't remember. Not Hello! but one of those papers. I did do the rock n
roll walking tour and it was great. I also couldn't find the cemetery Karlm Marx is buried in. I must be
more patient. Marley Once you find Highgate you can't miss it, what ever was the champion of
the proletariat doing getting himself buried in that monstrosity? (mind you
they did always say Engles did all the real work)

I'm so pathetic I couldn't find Highgate. Engles is highly under-rated, and
Karl told much of his stuff from Bakunin. Somethnig that still sticks in
the craw of anarchists. Robin

"Linda Fortney" <lfortney@dc.umd.edu> wrote in message
news:c0jg13$q8q@tracy.umd.edu... In article <Y58Xb.30457$fV5.644653@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, Marley Greiner <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:BTW, I've been meaning to mention that I read Patricia Cornwell's book onJack the Ripper and she gives a much more solid argument that appeared inexcerpt in Vanity Fair. I'd dismissed Sickert 25 years ago or more as
Saucy Speaking of mass murderers, I just read a wonderful explaination of how the Lizzie Borden murders make perfect sense if you understand WASP folkways. You have branches of the Borden family "not speaking" to one another for years. You have rival churches in the twon "not speaking" to one another for years. The tension builds and builds, and instead of having words with your father and stepmother, you go ape and hit them over the head with an axe. I heartily reccomend the book King, Florence _Oh Wasp Where is thy Sting_ Linda

That's interesting. Are you famliar with the performance piece/play Fall
River Follies? It is my all-time favourite OSU did the world premiere and
some of our students were in it, but it's been done other places. You
wonder why it took Liszie so long. Papa was so cheap he actually had the
indoor plumbing removed the the house and made them use an outhouse.

Marley

>Well there's always forum.adoption.com you can hang around over there for awhile then pop back over here and be as offensive as you please.

Could post the link to their message board? Thank you.

DMC

On 14 Feb 2004 00:40:44 GMT, dmc10709@aol.com (Dmc10709) wrote:
Well there's always forum.adoption.com you can hang around over there for awhile then pop back over here and be as offensive as you please.Could post the link to their message board? Thank you.DMC


http://forums.adoption.com/

<< "Robin Harritt" <karakoram@postadoption.info> wrote in message
news:BC52BC70.34148%karakoram@postadoption.info... in article 166Xb.29852$fV5.633258@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net,
Marley Greiner at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 3:32 pm: "Robin Harritt" <karakoram@postadoption.info> wrote in message news:BC524BDE.33FC9%karakoram@postadoption.info... in article KL_Wb.13491$hR.391186@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, Marley Greiner
at maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net wrote on 13/2/04 7:10 am: <snip>>> Well there's always forum.adoption.com you can hang around over there
for a>> while then pop back over here and be as offensive as you please.
Seems to>> work for some people.>>>> BTW I got my post kicked of there three times last night, they don't
like>> their policy criticised much do they.>>>> Robin>>> What in the world did you say? Weren't you grateful enough?>> Marley> I commented on the unfairness and futility of the following:- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++ New Policy To Be Effective Immediately (02-10-2004 until 03-12-2004) NEW POLICY TO BE EFFECTIVELY IMMEDIATELY: Adoption Media, LLC has
implemented the following new policy. Due to the occurrence of large numbers of harsh, and potentially
slanderous posts about adoption professionals, and the occurrence of large numbers
of self-serving advertising disguised as independent posts, all comments
and discussions about adoption facilitators, agencies, attorneys, searchers
and other adoption professionals, whether positive or negative, MAY NOT BE
POSTED ON ADOPTION FORUMS. If individuals desire to provide or exchange this
kind of information, it will need to be done privately and by other means, such
as through private messaging and emails. If you are seeking information about a particular adoption
professional, it is acceptable to post a message that you are seeking information about
the experiences of others with that specific adoption professional, along
with a request that others may provide that information to you in a personal
message or email sent to your personal account. It will also be acceptable to post a message that you have experience
with a particular adoption professional (WITHOUT GIVING ANY DETAILS) and that
you can be contacted on a private basis, at a specific location, for more information. ANYONE THAT VIOLATES THIS NEW POLICY MAY BE PERMANENTLY BANNED FROM
FORUMS WITHOUT NOTICE. This change has become necessary because there isn1t any way to
determine the truthfulness of either positive or negative information that can be
posted on forums on an anonymous basis. So it would be equally unfair to erase,
or to allow the uncontrolled posting of either. Under the new policy, if an individual is certain that the information to be shared is true, and
can be documented, then they will still have the ability to share that
information on a private basis. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++ Once my response had been removed a third time without comment, I
decided to put the new policy to the test and gave Barnardos a jolly good slaging
off. That seems to have been perfectly acceptable. It must be only American adoption agencies that are beyond reproach. Robin Maybe they thought you were writing about Bretano's--the book store. Marley Some guy once wrote to me after reading one of my pieces about Barnardo's on another NG and said, "how wonderful it must have been being adopted in Barbados". So I'm never really sure if I'm making myself understood! Robin

Well..was it?

BTW, I've been meaning to mention that I read Patricia Cornwell's book on
Jack the Ripper and she gives a much more solid argument that appeared in
excerpt in Vanity Fair. I'd dismissed Sickert 25 years ago or more as Saucy
Jack, but I now think it's a good bet. I still don't understand, though,
and she really didn't address it, why the press slagged him off after Mary
Kellly's murder. There were certainly more killings after that one, though
perhaps not as brutal. The whole thing smacks of cover-up--not necessarily
of the perpetrator, but of police ineptitude maybe. Whether Sicket was Jack,
or not, he come across as a pretty despicable person, however.

I must admit I'm still taken with the idea that it was Leslie Stephens--just
for the fun factor of the Virginia Woolf connection.

Marley

Omigod, what a creative idea! You must know he banned his eldest daughter to a
back part of the house and no one but the help (and maybe Julia) saw her for
years, apparently all because she would not apply herself as diligently as he
thought she should to the language arts. She was eventually institutionalized
and no records now exist to explain what her problem, if any except with papa,
may have been. There was a definite price to pay for crossing the Victorian
"papa."

e

>That's interesting. Are you famliar with the performance piece/play FallRiver Follies? It is my all-time favourite OSU did the world premiere andsome of our students were in it, but it's been done other places. Youwonder why it took Liszie so long. Papa was so cheap he actually had theindoor plumbing removed the the house and made them use an outhouse.Marley


No, I had never heard of Fall River Follies.

Andrew Borden was a real cheapskate. Apparently the percipitating
incident for the murder was the fact that he had deeded a farm over to
Lizzie's stepmother. Lizzie freaked because he thought he was going to
disinheret her and her sister, so she did a hatchet number.

It was a very hot summer, and Lizzie took the axe in the middle of a heat
wave. Remember she had brooded, and brooded and brooded.

The ax is interesting, it isn't a typical women's murder weapon. Women
often poison. It seems that Lizzie had been all over small towns in Mass.
trying to buy cyanide from pharmacists, all of whom refused to sell it to
her. Hence the ax.

Linda

In article <i7cXb.15610$hR.454969@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, "Marley
Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> writes:
"Linda Fortney" <lfortney@dc.umd.edu> wrote in messagenews:c0jg13$q8q@tracy.umd.edu... In article <Y58Xb.30457$fV5.644653@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, Marley Greiner <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:BTW, I've been meaning to mention that I read Patricia Cornwell's book onJack the Ripper and she gives a much more solid argument that appeared inexcerpt in Vanity Fair. I'd dismissed Sickert 25 years ago or more asSaucy Speaking of mass murderers, I just read a wonderful explaination of how the Lizzie Borden murders make perfect sense if you understand WASP folkways. You have branches of the Borden family "not speaking" to one another for years. You have rival churches in the twon "not speaking" to one another for years. The tension builds and builds, and instead of having words with your father and stepmother, you go ape and hit them over the head with an axe. I heartily reccomend the book King, Florence _Oh Wasp Where is thy Sting_ LindaThat's interesting. Are you famliar with the performance piece/play FallRiver Follies? It is my all-time favourite OSU did the world premiere andsome of our students were in it, but it's been done other places. Youwonder why it took Liszie so long. Papa was so cheap he actually had theindoor plumbing removed the the house and made them use an outhouse.Marley

I read "The Fall River Axe Murders" by Angela Carter in our English book,
called, "Retellings," and was struck with the impression that Lizzie seemed to
suffer from a Dissociative Disorder. It mentions that from puberty she had
been troubled by "curious lapses of consciousness" and how they often came at
the time of her "menses." It also told of the fact that she was menstruating
at the time of the murders.

KL

"Linda Fortney" <lfortney@dc.umd.edu> wrote in message
news:c0lgm6$fhi@marlowe.umd.edu...That's interesting. Are you famliar with the performance piece/play FallRiver Follies? It is my all-time favourite OSU did the world premiere
andsome of our students were in it, but it's been done other places. Youwonder why it took Liszie so long. Papa was so cheap he actually had theindoor plumbing removed the the house and made them use an outhouse.Marley No, I had never heard of Fall River Follies.

I looked for information about it on the web, and can't really find
anything. It;s too bad. John Giiffen who wrote and directed it really needs
a page for it. Andrew Borden was a real cheapskate. Apparently the percipitating incident for the murder was the fact that he had deeded a farm over to Lizzie's stepmother. Lizzie freaked because he thought he was going to disinheret her and her sister, so she did a hatchet number. It was a very hot summer, and Lizzie took the axe in the middle of a heat wave. Remember she had brooded, and brooded and brooded. The ax is interesting, it isn't a typical women's murder weapon. Women often poison. It seems that Lizzie had been all over small towns in Mass. trying to buy cyanide from pharmacists, all of whom refused to sell it to her. Hence the ax. Linda

There's a great Lizzie Bordon webpage: http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com
The Lizzie Borden virtual museum and library with some really wonderful
stuff. If you go to diversions, there's a hilarious cartoon of Elsie the
Cow with a blood axe leering at Andrew's body on the couch. Byt there's a
lot of serious historical work on her there, too.

Marley

Oops CORRECTION: Here is the correct URL for Lizzie Borden:
http://www.lizzieandrewborden.com

Marley



"Linda Fortney" <lfortney@dc.umd.edu> wrote in message
news:c0lgm6$fhi@marlowe.umd.edu...That's interesting. Are you famliar with the performance piece/play FallRiver Follies? It is my all-time favourite OSU did the world premiere
andsome of our students were in it, but it's been done other places. Youwonder why it took Liszie so long. Papa was so cheap he actually had theindoor plumbing removed the the house and made them use an outhouse.Marley No, I had never heard of Fall River Follies. Andrew Borden was a real cheapskate. Apparently the percipitating incident for the murder was the fact that he had deeded a farm over to Lizzie's stepmother. Lizzie freaked because he thought he was going to disinheret her and her sister, so she did a hatchet number. It was a very hot summer, and Lizzie took the axe in the middle of a heat wave. Remember she had brooded, and brooded and brooded. The ax is interesting, it isn't a typical women's murder weapon. Women often poison. It seems that Lizzie had been all over small towns in Mass. trying to buy cyanide from pharmacists, all of whom refused to sell it to her. Hence the ax. Linda