Re: 1 (800) [blah blah blah]

From: Nancy Berntsen (email_address_at_end-of-post.com)
Date: 06/15/04 

Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 22:02:55 GMT

I would have expected a "heads up" such as that to be directed to me
privately, not publicly. (This is how I communicated with Kathleen, trying
to persuade her not to post so much about her family, etc.) You and others
never understood my relationship with her. I doubt you ever will be able to.
Having compassion for someone does not mean you believe everything they
stand for. I doubt I read as much as 10% of her posts. I did not approve of
her methods, but I respected her right to find out whatever she could and to
do what she could to make a difference in the Lyme world within legal and
ethical limits.

I do appreciate that you have denounced your original post though; three
times is enough now. I guess that's the best one could expect now that it's
been done.

I do not feel like a victim though. A target would be a better word for it.
It's true; once Lisa and Kathleen bowed out, some of you had to find new
targets. All I try to do here is give people hope, and this somehow gets
twisted into me going off my rocker about RICO or whatever else. I don't
even understand what RICO is all about. I thought it had to do with
racketeering and picketing without a permit or something. Someday when I'm
not busy making butterflies, I'll check into that. If I live long enough.
There are so many things I want to do yet.

Also, FYI, I come and go as I please through this open doorway. My purpose
is stated at my website. It's no secret. It's all about hope. You have a
problem with people that believe in God and the power of prayer. Well,
that's your loss. I wouldn't have found out about colloidal silver if it
weren't for prayer. I give credit where credit is due.

Also, "Equilibrium" is a movie with a theme sort of in parallel to the
novel, "Fahrenheit 451." Emotions and beauty are outlawed (except for the
secret "father" of the political movement.) The community/world is
micro-managed down to making sure people take their anti-emotion meds every
day.

I prefer living in the free world, free to take a few risks here and there.
I'm not going to get into all your other questions. You don't really want me
to anyway. Just remember, I said "ungrounded" and not "underground." There's
a big difference.

Nancy 

-- 
Email: berntsen AT oikourgos.com
"A_Weisman" <a_weisman@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e55e6d97.0406151336.b25737@posting.google.com...
> derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com (derdrittemann) wrote in message
news:<f2af2263.0406150513.3578ff5@posting.google.com>...
> > "Nancy Berntsen" <email_address@end-of-post.com> wrote in message
news:<sXrzc.333$2J7.108@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>...
> >
> >
> > > "Folks, not to worry. For the record, the "children" "jwismille" with
one s
> > > and a_weisman are "concerned about" are both senior citizens and are
totally
> > > competent in taking care of themselves". >
> >
> > And thank you, Nancy, for noticing that I am "clean" on this...and not
> > associated with it...
>
> Well der and nancy, for the record, I repudiate the posting
> encouraging reports.
>
> My post was not meant to encourage such reports. As I said.
>
> And I meant it.
>
> Believe it or not I was trying to give nancy some advice. Not to post
> about things that could come back to haunt her.
>
> I take her at her word that she has no minor children involved.
>
> I have no way of knowing otherwise. I don't know her other than
> through her messages. I take issue only with what she has written, now
> who she is. I don't know her so I can't take issue with her. Only the
> ideas she posts. Or her self righteous holier than thou tone. Or her
> support and enabling of people like kathloon. And her judgmental
> attitude towards others.
>
> Der I'd be careful to give her ammunition for her victim role.
>
> Yes, dissasocitiate yourself from the 1 800 posting. And my posting if
> you want. I am dissociating myself from the 1 800 posting.
>
> I'm not chuck. I'm not jwismille.
>
> > ...frankly, I would be extremely embarrassed to be associated with
> > this. I am sorry for you here.
>
> I'd be embarrassed to be associated with this too. I honestly
> sincerely did not mean for my post to lead to this. I said that I
> wasn't encouraging anyone to report.
>
> And I admitted that I didn't read nancy's tome in detail. I never read
> her things in detail. She goes on and on. Repeats herself. Goes off on
> tangents. None of what she says is particularly interesting to me.
>
> I got a sense of what she wrote. I skimmed it. I didn't pay attention
> to the details.
>
> She says her kids are adults. Fine.
>
> If they were minors I'd dissaprove. But I wouldn't report her. Or
> encourage others to do so. Not because I disagree with her.
>
> I've only encouraged reports to the authorities when people have
> threatened or harassed me.
>
> My post was meant to be a heads up to her.
>
> I don't know why she posts under her own name. It isn't smart to do
> so. Frankly, it isn't safe or prudent.
>
> As much as she accuses us (but not her friends) of posting under
> aliases, no sane person posts on the internet using their own name.
>
> Even hick is smart enough not to identify himself. Not smart enough
> that he didn't post reverse directions to his home in bellefonte pa.
> But he is smart enough to lie about it. And not post his real name in
> the first place.
>
> > It's getting REAL crazy around here now.
>
> LOL It's been REAL crazy around here for a long long time.
>
> That's why you'd have to be nuts to post your real name.
>
> I know at least one person who did but no one noticed. Or almost no
> one. Now that is a question that deserves an answer. LOL Know who I
> mean der? LOL