Re: Just Wondering
Posted by: "eran.gafni" eran.gafni@XXXXX.com eran.gafni
Tue Sep 15, 2009 2:55 am (PDT)
I think youdo a very good job, I never claimed the other way. But there is a person who probably can't argue with me in straight levels so he/she's taking the easy way - stealing my identity and posting some untrue or even repulsive things. That is TROLLism. They mistaken, though. It won't deter me at all. It only shows that they can't post here real arguments in defending the acts and thoughts of Manson.
--- In charlesmanson_ and_family@ yahoogroups. com, "candygramma70"
>
> -In defense of anyone and everyone- I can guarantee you there are no TROLLS in here. We USED to have a couple but they were shown the back door.
> There are strong differences of opinions here and thats what keeps this group active. One of the best active manson groups on the net. show me another manson active group. LOL
> I do believe in having both sides. and as for sensitivity. far as I can see no one has really got down and dirty. I hate to rag on someone for MINOR infractions Its like pick your battles to rag on.
> If you feel we are too lax/too strict just email the owners and we will se what we can do.
>
>
>
> -- In charlesmanson_ and_family@ yahoogroups. com, "eran.gafni"
> >
> > Tjis wasn';t my post. It was that Troll, who I guess is one of the friends of the Mansonites here.
> >
> > --- In charlesmanson_ and_family@ yahoogroups. com, David Paschal
> > >
> Yeah, exactly. Eran stop apologizing all over the place for what you say. You are double guessing yourself and don't. We need to get over this ultra sensitivity in this group.
>
> Also, as to anyone being negative or mean to the pro-manson people well I could go back and cut and paste the negative things that have been said about the reality manson people and it wouldn't be too nice. Difference is I don't care what they say.
> dp
(Yep, sucking up to CG is always the way to get into her good graces but it doesn't erase the cold hard truth. Eran DID send nasty shit to the group before but now chooses to deny it in order to save his worthless self. What an asshole!)
Re: Susan Atkins Denied Parole
Posted by: "eran.gafni" eran.gafni@XXXXX.com eran.gafni
Tue Sep 15, 2009 2:57 am (PDT)
A rape is forcing someone to have sexual acts (of any character) and also having sex with underage girl. It's the fault of the lax prosecution and courts in 1967-9 that Mansnon wasn't been found guilty of rapes.
--- In charlesmanson_ and_family@ yahoogroups. com, "candygramma70"
>
> -I suppose if done in prison it isnt called *rape*.
> But while he was never convicted of rape I suppose technically we cannot call him a rapist can we? Remember back in those times sex with underage while wasnt legal it was done.
>
>
>
> -- In charlesmanson_ and_family@ yahoogroups. com, "eran.gafni"
> >
> > He raped a fellow convict and also, legally, having sex with a girl under 16 is rape. He raped a girl from Risida and also he raped Sherry Cooper, both in 1969.
(Charlie wasn't convicted of rape because it didn't happen! The girls gave themselves to him willingly period! Eran probably raped someone which is why he chose to push his guilt onto Charlie. The asshole sure seems to know enough about it after all! Eran spelled "Manson" wrong too. That just goes to show what an uneducated puke he is.)
Re: Bruce Davis//RABBIT ATTACK RULES
Posted by: "eran.gafni" eran.gafni@XXXXX.com eran.gafni
Tue Sep 15, 2009 3:03 am (PDT)
First, I never said Bruce killed Zero, so I didn't contadict what Rabbit's "friend" said, so I don't see what the fuss is all about. I never claimed to know what happened to Zero, this is one thing I still look to find out about - whether he killed himslef or was murdered and - again - up util now nobody gave a good answer, and if someone claims to know everything but playing hide-and-seek, it means that:
1) either he doesn't know everything;
2) he imagines he knows something, and inventing also a strigns of know-it-all friends.
--- In charlesmanson_ and_family@ yahoogroups. com, "candygramma70"
>
> RABBIT WE DONOT REVERT TO THAT KIND IF TACTIC THAT IS NOT ALLOWED IN MY GROUP, I TAKE IT YOU HAVENT BEEN READING THAT NAME CALLING THE MEMBERS IS NOT ALLOWED. YOU COULD HAVE HANDLED WHAT ERAN SAID A WHOLE DIFFERENT WAY BY JUST SAYING MY FRIEND WAS NOT IMAGINARY INSTEAD OF THOIS WILD NAME CALLING RANT. HE IS NEITHER AN SOB ,IT WAS NOT SLANDER AND YOU DONOT KNOW IF HIS MOM KNEW WHO HIS FATHER WAS SO WATCH IT.
>
>
> --- In charlesmanson_ and_family@ yahoogroups. com, WHITE RABBITT
> >
> > u take that back eran u s-o-b
> > thats slander, u better watch
> > who u call a lier u bastard
(See how CG came to her sweetie Eran's defense? She was so pissed because someone dared to speak out against her King Eran that CAPS was the only way she felt her point could be made. What a pathetic wimp she is!)
Re: Susan Atkins Denied Parole
Posted by: "eran.gafni" eran.gafni@XXXXX.com eran.gafni
Tue Sep 15, 2009 3:37 am (PDT)
The doubt the Mansonites tryto instill in other people's mind is that Manson took care not to kill most of his victims by hand and also that he supposdely didn't "order" anyone to kill.
Many people who orchestrated killing sprees didn't took the kill themsleves - take Hitler who didn't kill a single Jew himslef, or Pol Pot who didn't kill anyone himslef. Take the Mafia bosses - hardly do they kill someone at all. Take the radio broadcasters in Rewanda who didn't kill anyone personally but still are been charged of inciting people to kill. Take drug lords in Colombia or Mexico - only a few are dirtying their hands in actual killing; they leave that job to their subordinated, and more. Does the fact that someone didn't kill anyone but was the leader of the persons who did the actual kill and made tham - in anyway - understand that this is what he wants - ever made them innocent?
Also, as for leadership. You don't have to be officially been called a leader to be one or considered to be one. Take Stalin. His 0fficial title was "General Secretary. But a leader is the person all group members look up to listen to his words, to follow his sayings and fulfill his wishes. It doens't matter if he didn't gave orders militaty-style. It is enough to hint, to use agreed coded words and insinuate for the group members to understand what the leader wants of them. Therefore, when Manson told Bobby 'you know what to do" Bobby understod right away that Manson meant he should kill Gary.
Even if Manson himself denies it, all the people present in the 1959 Ford leaving for the Tate residence heard Manson say the people in the house must be killed and it didn't took them a whole semester to understand that he wants them to kill the people in there.
Up until today people look up to MANSON, not to Tex (if he was the leader, as you claim, why don't you listen to what HE say, Noel?) People who were introduced to the group were told first about Charlie, not about anyone else and waited to meet HIM, not anyone else. When they gathered together by nighfall, whom did they listen to? To Tex? To Susan? To Sandy? No - they listened only to what CHARLIE had to say. They did only what CHARLIE told them to do. That's the fact. That's the truth and I'll keep saying it.
(As usual, Eran is a misguided asshole! He's just spewing the same shit as BUGliosi did when he misused the law so he could win his weak case against Charlie. Bottom line, the so-called "family" did what THEY wanted to do! They blamed Charlie to escape their own guilt because they weren't strong enough to go through the hell that HE has for THEIR crimes! Unfortunately, Eran and his Manson hating puppets will forever live in the delusion that Charlie was the "mastermind" or "leader" of those heinous murderers! I feel sorry for Eran and his followers:( They need to wake up!)
Re: Susan Atkins Denied Parole
Posted by: "eran.gafni" eran.gafni@XXXXX.com eran.gafni
Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:58 am (PDT)
Wait, I take the last part of my message back. It's not a fact Charlie told anyone what to do. It's my opinion.
(Thankfully, Eran admitted he was wrong in this post. Too bad he couldn't have done that in all the others.)
Re: Susan Atkins Denied Parole
Posted by: "atwa13x" atwa13x@XXXXX.com atwa13x
Tue Sep 15, 2009 5:12 am (PDT)
You make it sound like the killers couldn't function on their own and Charlie's so-called "Brainwashing" in a sense lets them off the hook. Correct me if I'm wrong please.
X (aka Noel)
--- In charlesmanson_ and_family@ yahoogroups. com, Cher Stoll
>
> I believe he brainwashed many. I still hold hope that on dyeing beds some will come out with what really happened but its doubtful. Maybe long after someone will find an older persons diary. Yet even then supporters will denounce it.
>
>
> Cher
(Cher seems so sure of herself. I feel sorry for her:( I don't believe Charlie brainwashed ANYONE in his circle because the biological parents did in fact have them first WAY before he ever came along. Charlie only gave them back to THEMSELVES as "Squeaky" said in the Hendrickson film titled: "Manson". The biological parents in the meantime were too busy programming their own children to be just like them with no independent thought.)
Re: Susan Atkins Denied Parole
Posted by: "atwa13x" atwa13x@XXXXX.com atwa13x
Tue Sep 15, 2009 5:12 am (PDT)
A person can do evil things without being evil themselves. I'm not blind Cher. I just see into things deeper than you and most others here.
X (aka Noel)
--- In charlesmanson_ and_family@ yahoogroups. com, Cher Stoll
>
> So you admit this...how do you hold a blind eye to how evil he is?
>
>
> Cher
(Too bad Cher and the other Manson haters can't see beyond the dark shadow cast on Charlie and realize that he is a genuine person who can see things as they truly are.)
Re: Just Wondering
Posted by: "atwa13x" atwa13x@XXXXX.com atwa13x
Tue Sep 15, 2009 5:45 am (PDT)
I think I have but I'll state my reasons for doubting them again. I don't usually like referring to anything Kasabian every said but in this case, I think it's necessary. She said in her testimony that they all WANTED to do everything and anything for Charlie. "Wanted" is the key word here. I believe everything they did was of their own free will. Charlie's influence in their lives may have contributed to what happened in a sense because they all felt they were doing what he asked. Sandy herself even stated this in an interview. However, that's NOT on the same lines as giving out orders. These were individuals who looked at Charlie as a Christ like figure in the same manner as others looked upon the Maharishi Yogi. I don't see much difference in the 2 except for the fact Maharishi Yogi had no hostile thoughts like Charlie. Maharishi Yogi had a better life than Charlie also. If someone is constantly exposed to negativity, it will of course be reflected in their words and actions. It becomes a part of their personality. I believe Charlie and the rest of his circle all felt the same way about life because they were all exposed to a great deal of negativity in their lives. Charlie more so than them but still, they all shared something in common which is why they became connected in the first place.
X (aka Noel)
--- In charlesmanson_ and_family@ yahoogroups. com, Cher Stoll
>
> I only beg to differ cuz you never post why you doubt them.
>
>
> Cher
>
(My response to Cher is among the main reasons I'm not against Charlie like her and the other Manson haters are. I know what it feels like to be labeled and judged improperly!)
Stay tuned for more next week;)
