Liz... I'm not doubting for a moment that's Kitty. But, is this really a photo from 2011? Are you sure this isn't like '02 or something? If that's really her today, she should be selling anti-aging creams, and workout/nutrtition dvd's! : )
Seriously though I've given this some thought - the Ruth vs. Kitty thing - and I've decided that if it's one night, Ruth. Anything long-term (i.e. a week or more), Kitty.
Yeah Matt... I'm in a particularly good mood today... I've got some type of an adrenaline rush. I'm not really sure why, but after middle age hits, you don't ask questions, you just GO with it!!LOL
I have to say Matt... It's really a toss-up. Both women are gorgeous! Again, after middle-age, you don't ask questions. LOL I'd be happy with either one. Although, I suppose for historical value alone, Ouisch would prolly be better bragging rites. I mean... she's OUISCH! You've got me there.
Did you see that side-shot of Ruth? Her breast is friggin' perfect! I mean... Dayummm! (I'm sorry ladies... I'm really not trying to be disrespectful or a gross pig... but, that IS a perfect breast side-view... it really is)
thanks for the seat L/S. I would be so tongue tied I'd be a blathering idiot. yeah, I know, what's new, eh? Looks like Kitty plays music. I am trying to get Liz to sponsor LottsaPoppa Lolapalooza with Grogan's band and Gypsy fronting a group and Brooks Posten must have a band and now Kitty's band. I bet some of Cappy's kids or other family kids are players. You wouldn't need to promote, every Palin and O'Reily and TMZ etc would be commenting. Would folk come? Sure would be something different.
She looks better now than she did in 1969!!! I'm 48 and like to think the years have been kind to me........considering the wild life I've lived. You know she lived hard back in the day.......the ranch, desert, drugs ect.. Still she looks younger than me.
My vote goes to Kitty hands down although Ruth looks great her pics came from a wedding where several hours of prep makeover,hairdresser r involved surely,Kittys pic seems rather impromtu little makeup or pearly whites showing just extrordinary beauty for her yrs.
Personally, didn't see it for this subject matter thence or today but beauty is in the eye the beholder, to each their own; willst leave my critique at that.
My fave femme fatales '69? I still embrace those (mainly) headliners: Leslie, Cappy, Sadie & Country Sue (honorable mentions to Hoyt, Ruth, Gypsy and Squeaky... Manson Family trading cards, anyone?) There were cards other nefarious types on the market previously, Charlie, etc.
Should you ever become availed of Country Sue circa 2011, do not be stingy, Liz. To harken back to my radio days lingo, 'an oldie but a goodie', as the rest.
How about Gypsy? She looks amazing, too. AndSandy looks much younger than her age in all the vids I have seen. Did Kitty do any time? Prisoners usually look way younger than their age as they are kept out of the sun and don't have the day-to-day rent/food/kids etc worries that carve out a story on the free citizens' faces. Tex looked way way younger for years. What does he look like now? Liz? Do you have the snaps?
fiona1933 said... Tex looked way way younger for years. What does he look like now? Liz? Do you have the snaps?
fiona there is a recent Tex pic here someplace. just keep looking through the older posts he will pop out at you. you can also look for Texes ex wife Kristen with her new husband. they are posted quite close to each other.
she also said: "Prisoners usually look way younger than their age as they are kept out of the sun and don't have the day-to-day rent/food/kids etc worries that carve out a story on the free citizens' faces."
Charlie said Kitty was the product of 2ooo yrs of breeding.
charlie said tht about Stephanie not kitty
February 23, 2011 9:44 AM[end quote]
Yes that is my error. Pardon my mistake. I confused Stephanie with Kitty but Gypsy, Nancy, Kitty, Jakobson, Polanski, Frykowski are jewish. There is a jewish aspect to this bizzarity hat I think is ignored.
I think Charlie read the Talmud in addition to scientology, hypnotism, Rosecusians, etc. There is a peculiar omission in all the books. These murders were a race-riot recipe so due the ethic makeup of the characters and the hypersensitivity to racial aspects in an already hotly charged arena I think the jewish aspect was intentionally left out of the public explanation until Charlie put a swastika on his forehead. There is a jewish angle to this case but I've never been able to document it. I think Bugliosi intentionally left the jewish Talmud out of helter skelter because it was already overly racially charged. But wouldn't this fit into Charlie's unbelievable drama? I have learned that to underestimate the bizarrness of Charlie and his mix of ideologies and philosophies is a mistake. Surely there are others who are suspicioious hat nobody mentions he jews yet Charlie is a buttonpusher. Why would Charlie not push all the buttons he could? My guess is he did yet the media edits him in order to avert armageddon.
There seems to be a plural theme to your message. Doubter(s)... "people"..."them".
Others here, evidently interpreted your words the same way as I have.
Anonymous follows with "bastards".
And Stacey follows with "Hater(s)", "them" and "they".
Katie has a right to her own opinion. I neither agree, nor make apologies for her statement. She's a big girl, and can formulate, defend, and live with the consequences of her own words. If she doesn't believe that's a recent photo of Kitty... that's her opinion, and her business.
As for me, I never agreed, dis-agreed, or commented one way or the other with Katie's opinion regarding Kitty's photo (or any other photos here, for that matter). I hasten to add... none of the other members of our blog did either.
If you're gonna get into this, you should state point blank who you are addressing (for your blog readers). I, nor the other fine members of T&L's blog, need to be lumped, or hated (by your followers) for no good reason.
If you've got something to say to Katie, Thelma or Louise, please address them directly. We'll all be better-off in the long run.
For the record: I've told Thelma and Louise (both very good friends) time and time again(in the distant past), to state their sources, when they cut-n-paste. I never got anywhere with that effort... so, I finally gave-up.
There's a lot of fine folks over at T&L's. This is concerniing the comments of one individual (whose also a good friend). Let's not blow this up, into anything bigger.
None of the Manson women (Snake, Nancy, Cappy, Sandy) look overly fabulous in their recent photos, 'cept for Kitty and Ruth. So, why would Liz take the time and effort, to mis-represent just those two women alone? What would be the gain?
60ish, is not that terribly old. There are some folks who age amazingly well... not many, but some. My Dad looked completely svelt until he got sick at 78... 2 years before he died. My mom is 15 years younger, and they always looked like a matching set. ...and Kitty does have a lot of stuff caked on her face, if you blow the photo up a bit.
Anywho... Even if there was a mistake, and the Kitty photo given to Liz is ten years old. I don't see the big deal. It's still more interesting than a 40 year old photo we've seen 1,000 times isn't it?
I don't mind the occasional feud. But, I hate to see folks fighting over next to nothing. ...and this seems like next to nothing to me. Am I missing something here?
Hi Liz, it's a fantastic site you have here and thanks for posting all the pics you do. The "hater" on the other site appears to be a genuine mad dog who regularly starts frothing at the mouth for no apparent reason... everyone else (including me) thinks you and this blog are great.
I have one further comment, that may shed some helpful light.
T&L's blog is very unique in one regard: It's completely un-censored.
ANYONE can join... no one is EVER kicked-off (no matter what)... and no one's comments are EVER deleted... regardless of what they say.
That's a set-up, and a creedo I appreciate. That's why I've frequented the blog, for so long.
Thelma and Louise themselves, had been booted from blogs in the past... as was Jim... as was Bret. Even Liz has stated a few times now, that she started her blog, having been disgruntled elsewhere. No one likes to be booted... harrassed, or have their comments deleted.
Thelma and Louise had a header when you entered their blog years ago... stating that it was going to be run differently... a truly open forum... no one booted... no one censored... everyone welcome. That statement has since been removed, but the mission has been maintained.
It's definitely a double-edged sword. There are obvious inherent pluses, and some obvious minuses to that model.
My point: I think folks from an outside view... assume T&L (and everyone on the blog) are in total agreement with every comment made there. With most blogs... that would be a safe assumption... 'cuz generally speaking (on most blogs)... anyone who disagrees with the great and powerful administrator... is booted, censored... or at least reprimanded till they leave. Hence... you end-up with a completely homogenious group who agree on everything, and a few lurkers afraid to speak. Such is not the case with T&L's... it's a vastly heterogeneous group
Yes... T&L's is something of a free-for-all at times. AND... when bloggers lose their voice elsewhere becuase of feuds... they generally end-up on our doorstep airing their laundry and feelings (ie.,.Jim, or Circumstance recently). They know they can come to T&L's, post and still be heard. In that regard, it's a refugee camp sometimes.
Bottom Line: Anyone who believes that Thelma and Louise agree with every comment made there, day-in and day-out, year-round, is not being realistic.
But, for all it's pitfalls... it's still a set-up I admire and enjoy. It takes a GREAT deal of patience to operate the way Thelma and Louise do... and I personally applaud them for it. You definitely get both sides of every issue there... from mild to wild. Manson lovers and Manson haters, all under one roof... there's no slant to it. That's something you rarley get elsewhere.
Our blog has always caught a LOT of shit (collectively), for everything I've just outlined. Every time someone steps out of line, we all become the "outlaws" again. This is really nothing new. But, you won't find a place with a more "homey" feel... and our detractors always find their way back again eventually.
(BTW... Louise has been completely MIA for a week now. I don't even no where she is. So... please don't lay any of this on her).
LIZ... Thanks for your time, and the bandwidth necessary to relate this message. I apology for taking-up so much space on your blog, over this less-than-joyous (and prolly less-than-interesting for most) subject (again). Much appreciated...
In the words of Rodney King: "Can't we all just get along"? LOL
I don't go to other sites, so I had no idea who Liz was referring to. I was merely trying to cheer her up. My "Haters gonna Hate" comment was sort of a slang/saying I hear from time to time. I didn't mean anyone in particular, just people in general...that goes for the they/them comment too... so if I pissed someone off or offended someone, sorry. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I wasn't "trying to get into anything".
No problem Stacey. As far as I'm concerned it's over.
Katie from T&L's blog, believes the photo is not recent. It's really not an outrageous notion. If she simply stated her opinion as such, it wouldn't have come to all this. Unfortunately, she included some un-necessarily strong language, and here we are.
yeah, absolutely, I can't say it any better than brownrice and others already have...you're the cat's pajamas Liz. I do go to the other site just cause I am a news junkie and they do have good stuff (a fun movie debate the other day) and several entertaining posters. L/S in particular is very impressive in his fair mindedness and writing style. I've said this to Liz before, but blogs strike me as a bit like bars - and every now and then someone will just have to much and just blow a gasket. It comes with the turf. But as long as we have quality bartenders like Matt and bouncers like Liz (just kidding Liz, you are of course the voluptuous headlining singer) than this place will be a trip to hang at.
Lynyrd, I know you aren't insinuating that this blog is censored but I'd like to clarify.
Eviliz.com is only censored if a comment is REALLY over the top like Jim's on X-mas eve when he made death threats. He is still welcome to comment if he keeps his emotions in check.
Eviliz.com does not ban anyone unless they take material from here and post it elsewhere as their own as someone who will remain nameless did recently.
The comments here are only moderated for those reasons. Other than that, have at it and by all means have fun.
Leary7 said>>>> "L/S in particular is very impressive in his fair mindedness and writing style".
Thanks for the kind words Leary... much appreciated. I've gotta learn to avoid getting involved in other people's problems though. That's a skill I could work-on. This has been going-on for years. Jim, Katie, Saint... are just the recent one's.
The fact that I'm still on good terms with everyone in Cyberspace, is nothing short of miraculous. Must be all that fair-mindedness and good writing, of which you speak. LOL
I've gotta learn to let other folks handle their own business in the future, and let them live with the consequences of their own words. I'm getting too old for this stuff... and the pay's not that great either! LOL If Di Stefano is up for a dozen more clients... I'm ready for a much-deserved retirement package! LOL
All I wanted to do, was just look at a few pictures. LMFAO
Oh well... as they say in Young Guns: "It's tough havin' Pals".
Leary... We've enjoyed having you also, as a new contributor. How can you not like a guy who's favorite actor is Bill Murray? LOL
Lynyrd- take it as you will. you are still very much welcome here. i didnt name names and places and like i said T&L are aware. i understand you defending them. i would advise next time to check with them first. you have not been here long so you dont know how it goes.
TO EVERYONE SO IT IS CLEAR this is a fucking BLOG, NOT HIGH SCHOOL. ain't playing baby games. and if it was high school i would be "that crazy bitch" (you know the one) waiting for you outside next to your car, who's tires i already slashed. then i would kick your ass plain and simple. not playing it here!!
*turns nice* - and to everyone else who gave my site props. thank you : )
I've always addressed You and Matt respectfully. Anyone can read my posts, which are public. There's no profanity, personal insults, or threats. That's not how I operate... and I won't to stoop to that foolishness.
I have my facts straight, and I also speak to Dianne off-blog on occasion. I don't see the significance there... but, whatever.
I'm gonna exit now, as I have no interest in fighting with you, or anyone else. There's nothing to be gained by that... and that's not why I came here. But, I will say this... I'm not impressed by a person who casts large stones while hiding behind the walls of their own blog. Let's get real... I've said nothing to merit this kind of attack. Peace...
I deleted the email with the address. Please resend so I can send you your package. I'm going to the Post Office today. My email is shot out for some reason.
I'm sorry Katie attacked you for apparently no reason.
Katie actually has a legitimate reason why she personalizes the murders, and defends the victims beyond the average person. I won't go beyond that... as not to betray the trust of a friend.
Liz... Things in life, are not always as they seem. I think you know, what I'm saying. Unfortunately, there were/are people effected in various ways by the events 40 years ago.
We see these photos, as interesting, fun, historical... etc.
Katie views them as glorifying the deeds of criminals, and those who be-friended them. Unfortunately, you caught the brunt of that.
I hope that makes some sense, and we can all just try to understand each other.
Katie, as hard as it is to see from your perspective(being attacked by her so vehemently), actually feels she's defending what's right. Unfortunately, she uses over-the-top tactics... of which I don't recommend.
I've told her on our blog, to dis-continue the swearing, threats, insults... etc... and just state her opinion sensibly. Leary can confirm this fact.
I know full well Liz, that you don't post photos to demean the victims, or hurt anyone. Unfortunately... everyone views things from their own personal experience and perspective. There's not much anyone can do about that. Hope I made some sense.
It's all good Liz. No hard feelings. There's enough stress in life without all this.
Peace.........
BTW, Stacey... love the Avatar.
And Matt... I'm still waiting on that Charlie/Mama Cass photo! LOLOL : )
Matt said... Lynyrd, I know you aren't insinuating that this blog is censored but I'd like to clarify.[end quote]
C'mon man, own up. Charlie first carved an X in his forehead and every Family member followed. Then he carved a swastika and nobody followed. Does nobody dare to even comment on this? Are we that scared of the jews? Are they that evil?
I'm reading 'Manson In His Own Words' for the second time and he mentions neither the X or the swastika. I'll research and see when he changed the X into a swastika. When the girls refused to carve their Xs into swastikas was this the 1st break in philosophy between them and Charlie? I don't even recall any of the men carving Xs in their foreheads.
"C'mon man, own up. Charlie first carved an X in his forehead and every Family member followed. Then he carved a swastika and nobody followed. Does nobody dare to even comment on this? Are we that scared of the jews? Are they that evil?"
Could you please elaborate on this? Not sure where you are going with this. Just curious.
Yes that is my error. Pardon my mistake. I confused Stephanie with Kitty but Gypsy, Nancy, Kitty, Jakobson, Polanski, Frykowski are jewish. There is a jewish aspect to this bizzarity hat I think is ignored. --------
MrPoirot, You mention Jews time and time again. You incorrectly said on another blog that Loughner is Jewish. You are incorrect on all of the above except Gypsy. I don't know what you are getting at, but quite frankly I'm a bit disturbed by it. If you have a point to make, make it and back it up with facts.
I'll go arm in arm with Matt on this one. I was involved with the Oswald stuff for a long time and it was amazing the folk that would come to that subject with their own personal agenda. It's okay some of the time if you have an agenda. just be up front about it. Someone's blog - especially someone as nice and evil as Liz - isn't the place for sneakiness.
orwhut said... Hi guys, This is my first post. Leary7 told me about the up to date pix at this site and I've been enjoying them. Thanks for all your hard work.
I have seen a picture of Clem with an X on his head (on a you tube video) and also Chuck Lovette carved a swastika on his head, Im not sure of any other family guys ( besides Bruce Davis) who did X themselves out.
I didnt mean no worries, of course not. But not day-to-day worries. These carve out a particular wrinkle. They write a story. Prisoners get a different look, I see it on the crime channels all the time, they all look so young. I think, every day, their basic life is the same, not raising kids, not pursuing a career, all time marked out. their worries require them to be alert and not get killed: I think that would keep you young and sharp. Living at "Now' as it were. People who have a strong vocation in life look young too. They also live at Now, life is spent constantly learning and being alert. It keeps you smooth. Its that endless boring hassle worry that puts the lines on a free citizen.
Above, Kitty Lutesinger 2010
Kitty, circa 1967
Another one that Father Time has been kind to!
ReplyDeleteWOW....
ReplyDeleteFountain of Youth?
I'd sit on the street-corner with her now! LOL
I'm floored. She looks freakishly young. What's her secret?
ReplyDeleteYOWZA... I had to double-back for a another look!
ReplyDeleteShe's absolutely delicious huh?! Wow...
Matt... you'll have to raffle-off the seat between Ruth and Kitty at the re-union for $100 a chance. LOLOLOL
Talk about a HOT ticket!! hahaha
"And the winner of our Ruth-Kitty drawing is... DRUMROLL PLEASE...
LEARY7!!!!!" LOLOL
DAMN! ...All the other men hang their head in disappointment.
Skynyrd... what did you get?
"I'm between Barabara Hoyt and the bathroom"! ROFLMAO
"I flew all the way out for this"??? hahaha
Circumstance, what did you get?
"Susan Atkins"! AHahaha
Wow... evidently, the tickets were printed-up WAY in advance!!! AHahahahaha
Actually, I always envisioned a re-union outside, ranch-style by a fire... but, it's just a funny skit. LOLOL
Kitty & Ouich both have good genes, it appears. My vote goes slightly to Kitty. I prefer lighter hair & skin, but that's just me.
ReplyDeleteI don't know, Cappy would be alright. All you got to do is nail the pic of Kitty on the headboard and there you go!
ReplyDeletelack of hard livin makes her still look good
ReplyDeleteKen said>>>
ReplyDelete"I don't know, Cappy would be alright. All you got to do is nail the pic of Kitty on the headboard and there you go"!
ROFLMAO
Ken... You owe me a new monitor screen... mine's covered with coffee now! LOLOL
J/K
Disclaimer:
Actually, I don't think the other women look that bad for their age.
But Kitty and Ruth do look amazing.
Liz... I'm not doubting for a moment that's Kitty.
ReplyDeleteBut, is this really a photo from 2011?
Are you sure this isn't like '02 or something?
If that's really her today, she should be selling anti-aging creams, and workout/nutrtition dvd's! : )
Oops!
ReplyDeleteIt says... "2010" under the photos.
I missed that label. ; )
Lynyrd, good to see you so excited. LMAO!
ReplyDeleteSeriously though I've given this some thought - the Ruth vs. Kitty thing - and I've decided that if it's one night, Ruth. Anything long-term (i.e. a week or more), Kitty.
Yeah Matt...
ReplyDeleteI'm in a particularly good mood today... I've got some type of an adrenaline rush.
I'm not really sure why, but after middle age hits, you don't ask questions, you just GO with it!!LOL
I have to say Matt...
It's really a toss-up.
Both women are gorgeous!
Again, after middle-age, you don't ask questions. LOL
I'd be happy with either one.
Although, I suppose for historical value alone, Ouisch would prolly be better bragging rites.
I mean... she's OUISCH!
You've got me there.
Did you see that side-shot of Ruth?
Her breast is friggin' perfect!
I mean... Dayummm!
(I'm sorry ladies... I'm really not trying to be disrespectful or a gross pig... but, that IS a perfect breast side-view... it really is)
thanks for the seat L/S. I would be so tongue tied I'd be a blathering idiot. yeah, I know, what's new, eh?
ReplyDeleteLooks like Kitty plays music. I am trying to get Liz to sponsor LottsaPoppa Lolapalooza with Grogan's band and Gypsy fronting a group and Brooks Posten must have a band and now Kitty's band. I bet some of Cappy's kids or other family kids are players. You wouldn't need to promote, every Palin and O'Reily and TMZ etc would be commenting. Would folk come? Sure would be something different.
"LottsaPoppa Lolapalooza"
ReplyDeleteLMAO
Hey... I'd go!
We should contract the two names a bit though.
Lottsappopalooza?
Lottsapalooza?
Lottsapoppa's-a-loser? LOLOL
(I think I got too much sleep last night) : )
She looks better now than she did in 1969!!!
ReplyDeleteI'm 48 and like to think the years have been kind to me........considering the wild life I've lived.
You know she lived hard back in the day.......the ranch, desert, drugs ect..
Still she looks younger than me.
My vote goes to Kitty hands down although Ruth looks great her pics came from a wedding where several hours of prep makeover,hairdresser r involved surely,Kittys pic seems rather impromtu little makeup or pearly whites showing just extrordinary beauty for her yrs.
ReplyDeleteIt kinda looks like Bobby in the photo on the fireplace mantle behind Kitty.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDeleteIt kinda looks like Bobby in the photo on the fireplace mantle behind Kitty.
if i only knew where my magnifying glass went.
SHES STILL PRETTY
ReplyDeleteDIANNE
She has Nancy Pitman's long chin.
ReplyDeleteCharlie said Kitty was the product of 2ooo yrs of breeding.
Well.......I got my hammer and nail in hand. Good night everybody.
ReplyDeleteshe looks pretty dang good.
ReplyDeleteMrPoirot said...
ReplyDeleteCharlie said Kitty was the product of 2ooo yrs of breeding.
charlie said tht about Stephanie
not kitty
Personally, didn't see it for this subject matter thence or today but beauty is in the eye the beholder, to each their own; willst leave my critique at that.
ReplyDeleteMy fave femme fatales '69? I still embrace those (mainly) headliners: Leslie, Cappy, Sadie & Country Sue (honorable mentions to Hoyt, Ruth, Gypsy and Squeaky... Manson Family trading cards, anyone?) There were cards other nefarious types on the market previously, Charlie, etc.
Should you ever become availed of Country Sue circa 2011, do not be stingy, Liz. To harken back to my radio days lingo, 'an oldie but a goodie', as the rest.
How about Gypsy? She looks amazing, too. AndSandy looks much younger than her age in all the vids I have seen. Did Kitty do any time? Prisoners usually look way younger than their age as they are kept out of the sun and don't have the day-to-day rent/food/kids etc worries that carve out a story on the free citizens' faces. Tex looked way way younger for years.
ReplyDeleteWhat does he look like now? Liz? Do you have the snaps?
fiona1933 said...
ReplyDeleteTex looked way way younger for years.
What does he look like now? Liz? Do you have the snaps?
fiona there is a recent Tex pic here someplace. just keep looking through the older posts he will pop out at you. you can also look for Texes ex wife Kristen with her new husband. they are posted quite close to each other.
fiona1933 said, "How about Gypsy? She looks amazing, too."
ReplyDeleteSo would I if I had her plastic surgeon. Not sure how much of what's left is original Catherine Share...
she also said: "Prisoners usually look way younger than their age as they are kept out of the sun and don't have the day-to-day rent/food/kids etc worries that carve out a story on the free citizens' faces."
ReplyDeleteUm, no worries in jail? Are you for reals?
eviliz said...
ReplyDelete[quote]MrPoirot said...
Charlie said Kitty was the product of 2ooo yrs of breeding.
charlie said tht about Stephanie
not kitty
February 23, 2011 9:44 AM[end quote]
Yes that is my error. Pardon my mistake. I confused Stephanie with Kitty but Gypsy, Nancy, Kitty, Jakobson, Polanski, Frykowski are jewish. There is a jewish aspect to this bizzarity hat I think is ignored.
I think Charlie read the Talmud in addition to scientology, hypnotism, Rosecusians, etc. There is a peculiar omission in all the books. These murders were a race-riot recipe so due the ethic makeup of the characters and the hypersensitivity to racial aspects in an already hotly charged arena I think the jewish aspect was intentionally left out of the public explanation until Charlie put a swastika on his forehead. There is a jewish angle to this case but I've never been able to document it. I think Bugliosi intentionally left the jewish Talmud out of helter skelter because it was already overly racially charged. But wouldn't this fit into Charlie's unbelievable drama? I have learned that to underestimate the bizarrness of Charlie and his mix of ideologies and philosophies is a mistake.
Surely there are others who are suspicioious hat nobody mentions he jews yet Charlie is a buttonpusher. Why would Charlie not push all the buttons he could? My guess is he did yet the media edits him in order to avert armageddon.
Ahhh. EVIL Liz is back!
ReplyDeletenot completely yet. getting there.
ReplyDeleteDon't let one head case get to you. A fart in the wind...
ReplyDeleteLiz -
ReplyDeleteOn behalf of the many anonymous visitors to your site, thank you for the awesome photos! And don't let the bastards get you down!
Awww, Liz. Don't them get to you. Haters gonna hate. That's what they do. No one is forcing them to come here, they do that on their own.
ReplyDeleteYou gotta good site here. We all know that. And honestly WTF would be the point of posting fake pics?
Welcome back Liz. xxx
ReplyDeletethey never get me down. i felt i had to address it. and a few othermatters as well. the people who it is addressed at will know.
ReplyDeleteHello Liz,
ReplyDeleteThere seems to be a plural theme to your message.
Doubter(s)... "people"..."them".
Others here, evidently interpreted your words the same way as I have.
Anonymous follows with "bastards".
And Stacey follows with "Hater(s)", "them" and "they".
Katie has a right to her own opinion.
I neither agree, nor make apologies for her statement.
She's a big girl, and can formulate, defend, and live with the consequences of her own words.
If she doesn't believe that's a recent photo of Kitty... that's her opinion, and her business.
As for me, I never agreed, dis-agreed, or commented one way or the other with Katie's opinion regarding Kitty's photo (or any other photos here, for that matter).
I hasten to add... none of the other members of our blog did either.
If you're gonna get into this, you should state point blank who you are addressing (for your blog readers).
I, nor the other fine members of T&L's blog, need to be lumped, or hated (by your followers) for no good reason.
If you've got something to say to Katie, Thelma or Louise, please address them directly.
We'll all be better-off in the long run.
For the record:
I've told Thelma and Louise (both very good friends) time and time again(in the distant past), to state their sources, when they cut-n-paste.
I never got anywhere with that effort... so, I finally gave-up.
There's a lot of fine folks over at T&L's.
This is concerniing the comments of one individual (whose also a good friend).
Let's not blow this up, into anything bigger.
This is a post I made this morning at T&L's:
ReplyDeleteHi Katie,
None of the Manson women (Snake, Nancy, Cappy, Sandy) look overly fabulous in their recent photos, 'cept for Kitty and Ruth.
So, why would Liz take the time and effort, to mis-represent just those two women alone?
What would be the gain?
60ish, is not that terribly old.
There are some folks who age amazingly well... not many, but some.
My Dad looked completely svelt until he got sick at 78... 2 years before he died.
My mom is 15 years younger, and they always looked like a matching set.
...and Kitty does have a lot of stuff caked on her face, if you blow the photo up a bit.
Anywho...
Even if there was a mistake, and the Kitty photo given to Liz is ten years old.
I don't see the big deal.
It's still more interesting than a 40 year old photo we've seen 1,000 times isn't it?
I don't mind the occasional feud.
But, I hate to see folks fighting over next to nothing.
...and this seems like next to nothing to me.
Am I missing something here?
Lastly...
ReplyDeleteThelma and Louise are very nice women.
I'd be re-miss to neglect saying that.
As Forrset Gump says:
"An that's all I gotta say about that". LOLOL
Hi Liz,
ReplyDeleteit's a fantastic site you have here and thanks for posting all the pics you do. The "hater" on the other site appears to be a genuine mad dog who regularly starts frothing at the mouth for no apparent reason... everyone else (including me) thinks you and this blog are great.
She still has some hippie in her. I like hippies that stay hippies. Something about conformity has always bothered me.
ReplyDeleteNo one should doubt these pictures. I know the source and these are current.
ReplyDeleteFYI You shouldn't question Eviliz on what she does, she might put a spell on you (or worse).
I am here often but almost never comments. But I want you to know that I love, love, love your site. Thanks for all you do!
ReplyDeleteI have one further comment, that may shed some helpful light.
ReplyDeleteT&L's blog is very unique in one regard:
It's completely un-censored.
ANYONE can join... no one is EVER kicked-off (no matter what)... and no one's comments are EVER deleted... regardless of what they say.
That's a set-up, and a creedo I appreciate.
That's why I've frequented the blog, for so long.
Thelma and Louise themselves, had been booted from blogs in the past... as was Jim... as was Bret.
Even Liz has stated a few times now, that she started her blog, having been disgruntled elsewhere.
No one likes to be booted... harrassed, or have their comments deleted.
Thelma and Louise had a header when you entered their blog years ago... stating that it was going to be run differently... a truly open forum... no one booted... no one censored... everyone welcome.
That statement has since been removed, but the mission has been maintained.
It's definitely a double-edged sword.
There are obvious inherent pluses, and some obvious minuses to that model.
My point:
I think folks from an outside view... assume T&L (and everyone on the blog) are in total agreement with every comment made there.
With most blogs... that would be a safe assumption... 'cuz generally speaking (on most blogs)... anyone who disagrees with the great and powerful administrator... is booted, censored... or at least reprimanded till they leave.
Hence... you end-up with a completely homogenious group who agree on everything, and a few lurkers afraid to speak.
Such is not the case with T&L's... it's a vastly heterogeneous group
Yes... T&L's is something of a free-for-all at times.
AND... when bloggers lose their voice elsewhere becuase of feuds... they generally end-up on our doorstep airing their laundry and feelings (ie.,.Jim, or Circumstance recently).
They know they can come to T&L's, post and still be heard.
In that regard, it's a refugee camp sometimes.
Bottom Line:
Anyone who believes that Thelma and Louise agree with every comment made there, day-in and day-out, year-round, is not being realistic.
But, for all it's pitfalls... it's still a set-up I admire and enjoy.
It takes a GREAT deal of patience to operate the way Thelma and Louise do... and I personally applaud them for it.
You definitely get both sides of every issue there... from mild to wild.
Manson lovers and Manson haters, all under one roof... there's no slant to it.
That's something you rarley get elsewhere.
Our blog has always caught a LOT of shit (collectively), for everything I've just outlined.
Every time someone steps out of line, we all become the "outlaws" again. This is really nothing new.
But, you won't find a place with a more "homey" feel... and our detractors always find their way back again eventually.
(BTW...
Louise has been completely MIA for a week now.
I don't even no where she is.
So... please don't lay any of this on her).
LIZ...
Thanks for your time, and the bandwidth necessary to relate this message.
I apology for taking-up so much space on your blog, over this less-than-joyous (and prolly less-than-interesting for most) subject (again).
Much appreciated...
In the words of Rodney King:
"Can't we all just get along"? LOL
I don't go to other sites, so I had no idea who Liz was referring to. I was merely trying to cheer her up. My "Haters gonna Hate" comment was sort of a slang/saying I hear from time to time. I didn't mean anyone in particular, just people in general...that goes for the they/them comment too...
ReplyDeleteso if I pissed someone off or offended someone, sorry. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I wasn't "trying to get into anything".
No problem Stacey.
ReplyDeleteAs far as I'm concerned it's over.
Katie from T&L's blog, believes the photo is not recent.
It's really not an outrageous notion.
If she simply stated her opinion as such, it wouldn't have come to all this.
Unfortunately, she included some un-necessarily strong language, and here we are.
No hard feelings on my end.
Peace...
yeah, absolutely, I can't say it any better than brownrice and others already have...you're the cat's pajamas Liz.
ReplyDeleteI do go to the other site just cause I am a news junkie and they do have good stuff (a fun movie debate the other day) and several entertaining posters. L/S in particular is very impressive in his fair mindedness and writing style.
I've said this to Liz before, but blogs strike me as a bit like bars - and every now and then someone will just have to much and just blow a gasket. It comes with the turf. But as long as we have quality bartenders like Matt and bouncers like Liz (just kidding Liz, you are of course the voluptuous headlining singer) than this place will be a trip to hang at.
Lynyrd, I know you aren't insinuating that this blog is censored but I'd like to clarify.
ReplyDeleteEviliz.com is only censored if a comment is REALLY over the top like Jim's on X-mas eve when he made death threats. He is still welcome to comment if he keeps his emotions in check.
Eviliz.com does not ban anyone unless they take material from here and post it elsewhere as their own as someone who will remain nameless did recently.
The comments here are only moderated for those reasons. Other than that, have at it and by all means have fun.
Leary7 said>>>>
ReplyDelete"L/S in particular is very impressive in his fair mindedness and writing style".
Thanks for the kind words Leary...
much appreciated.
I've gotta learn to avoid getting involved in other people's problems though.
That's a skill I could work-on.
This has been going-on for years.
Jim, Katie, Saint... are just the recent one's.
The fact that I'm still on good terms with everyone in Cyberspace, is nothing short of miraculous.
Must be all that fair-mindedness and good writing, of which you speak. LOL
I've gotta learn to let other folks handle their own business in the future, and let them live with the consequences of their own words.
I'm getting too old for this stuff... and the pay's not that great either! LOL
If Di Stefano is up for a dozen more clients... I'm ready for a much-deserved retirement package! LOL
All I wanted to do, was just look at a few pictures. LMFAO
Oh well... as they say in Young Guns:
"It's tough havin' Pals".
Leary...
We've enjoyed having you also, as a new contributor.
How can you not like a guy who's favorite actor is Bill Murray? LOL
Stella's got her groove back. lol!
ReplyDeleteLynyrd- take it as you will. you are still very much welcome here.
ReplyDeletei didnt name names and places and like i said T&L are aware. i understand you defending them. i would advise next time to check with them first.
you have not been here long so you dont know how it goes.
TO EVERYONE SO IT IS CLEAR
this is a fucking BLOG, NOT HIGH SCHOOL. ain't playing baby games. and if it was high school i would be "that crazy bitch" (you know the one) waiting for you outside next to your car, who's tires i already slashed. then i would kick your ass plain and simple. not playing it here!!
*turns nice* - and to everyone else who gave my site props. thank you : )
Liz...
ReplyDeleteI said "Louise" has been MIA... which is VERY true.
"Louise" on the blog, is Jane.
"Thelma" on the blog, is Dianne.
Their are two administrators over there...
Jane amd Dianne.
I was referring to Jane.
Yes... Dianne has been there every day. I know that very well.
Liz...
ReplyDeleteI've always addressed You and Matt respectfully.
Anyone can read my posts, which are public.
There's no profanity, personal insults, or threats.
That's not how I operate... and I won't to stoop to that foolishness.
I have my facts straight, and I also speak to Dianne off-blog on occasion.
I don't see the significance there... but, whatever.
I'm gonna exit now, as I have no interest in fighting with you, or anyone else.
There's nothing to be gained by that... and that's not why I came here.
But, I will say this... I'm not impressed by a person who casts large stones while hiding behind the walls of their own blog.
Let's get real... I've said nothing to merit this kind of attack.
Peace...
Liz,
ReplyDeleteI deleted the email with the address. Please resend so I can send you your package. I'm going to the Post Office today. My email is shot out for some reason.
l/s sorry you feel that way. i didn't see it as an attack. you are always welcomed back at any time. peace
ReplyDeleteHey Liz...
ReplyDeleteForget about it.
It's over.
I'm sorry Katie attacked you for apparently no reason.
Katie actually has a legitimate reason why she personalizes the murders, and defends the victims beyond the average person.
I won't go beyond that... as not to betray the trust of a friend.
Liz...
Things in life, are not always as they seem.
I think you know, what I'm saying.
Unfortunately, there were/are people effected in various ways by the events 40 years ago.
We see these photos, as interesting, fun, historical... etc.
Katie views them as glorifying the deeds of criminals, and those who be-friended them.
Unfortunately, you caught the brunt of that.
I hope that makes some sense, and we can all just try to understand each other.
Katie, as hard as it is to see from your perspective(being attacked by her so vehemently), actually feels she's defending what's right.
Unfortunately, she uses over-the-top tactics... of which I don't recommend.
I've told her on our blog, to dis-continue the swearing, threats, insults... etc... and just state her opinion sensibly.
Leary can confirm this fact.
I know full well Liz, that you don't post photos to demean the victims, or hurt anyone.
Unfortunately... everyone views things from their own personal experience and perspective.
There's not much anyone can do about that.
Hope I made some sense.
It's all good Liz.
No hard feelings.
There's enough stress in life without all this.
Peace.........
BTW, Stacey... love the Avatar.
And Matt...
I'm still waiting on that Charlie/Mama Cass photo! LOLOL : )
LynyrdSkynyrdBand- my bad i am sorry and deleting all the nasty stuff. email me at mansonfamily1967@gmail.com
ReplyDeleteL/S- i admit it i was bad. wtf can i say? my name is eviliz
ReplyDeletetruce
L/S,
ReplyDeleteglad you liked the avatar....I believe in educating kids young on the classics.... ;-)
Matt said...
ReplyDeleteLynyrd, I know you aren't insinuating that this blog is censored but I'd like to clarify.[end quote]
C'mon man, own up. Charlie first carved an X in his forehead and every Family member followed. Then he carved a swastika and nobody followed. Does nobody dare to even comment on this? Are we that scared of the jews? Are they that evil?
when did he carve the swawstica?
ReplyDeleteeviliz said...
ReplyDeletewhen did he carve the swawstica?
February 25, 2011 10:28 PM[end quote]
I'm reading 'Manson In His Own Words' for the second time and he mentions neither the X or the swastika. I'll research and see when he changed the X into a swastika. When the girls refused to carve their Xs into swastikas was this the 1st break in philosophy between them and Charlie? I don't even recall any of the men carving Xs in their foreheads.
MrPoirot said...
ReplyDeleteI don't even recall any of the men carving Xs in their foreheads.
remember Bruce emerging from the sewers to turn himself in? he had a freshly carved "X" thanks to Brenda.
MrPoirot said
ReplyDelete"C'mon man, own up. Charlie first carved an X in his forehead and every Family member followed. Then he carved a swastika and nobody followed. Does nobody dare to even comment on this? Are we that scared of the jews? Are they that evil?"
Could you please elaborate on this? Not sure where you are going with this. Just curious.
MrPoirot said...
ReplyDeleteYes that is my error. Pardon my mistake. I confused Stephanie with Kitty but Gypsy, Nancy, Kitty, Jakobson, Polanski, Frykowski are jewish. There is a jewish aspect to this bizzarity hat I think is ignored.
--------
MrPoirot, You mention Jews time and time again. You incorrectly said on another blog that Loughner is Jewish. You are incorrect on all of the above except Gypsy. I don't know what you are getting at, but quite frankly I'm a bit disturbed by it. If you have a point to make, make it and back it up with facts.
To clarify, the only FAMILY member with Jewish ancestry was Gypsy.
ReplyDeleteFrykowski wasn't Jewish.
Gregg Jakobson - who knows
Yes Matt a bit disturbing...still I am curious. It's the Religious Studies major in me - what are you getting at, Poirot?
ReplyDeleteI'll go arm in arm with Matt on this one. I was involved with the Oswald stuff for a long time and it was amazing the folk that would come to that subject with their own personal agenda. It's okay some of the time if you have an agenda. just be up front about it. Someone's blog - especially someone as nice and evil as Liz - isn't the place for sneakiness.
ReplyDeleteHi guys,
ReplyDeleteThis is my first post. Leary7 told me about the up to date pix at this site and I've been enjoying them. Thanks for all your hard work.
orwhut said...
ReplyDeleteHi guys,
This is my first post. Leary7 told me about the up to date pix at this site and I've been enjoying them. Thanks for all your hard work.
thanks and welcome!!
Welcome orwhut!
ReplyDeleteI have seen a picture of Clem with an X on his head (on a you tube video) and also Chuck Lovette carved a swastika on his head, Im not sure of any other family guys ( besides Bruce Davis) who did X themselves out.
ReplyDeletesure this isn't Kitty's daughter?
ReplyDeleteI didnt mean no worries, of course not. But not day-to-day worries. These carve out a particular wrinkle. They write a story. Prisoners get a different look, I see it on the crime channels all the time, they all look so young. I think, every day, their basic life is the same, not raising kids, not pursuing a career, all time marked out. their worries require them to be alert and not get killed: I think that would keep you young and sharp. Living at "Now' as it were. People who have a strong vocation in life look young too. They also live at Now, life is spent constantly learning and being alert. It keeps you smooth. Its that endless boring hassle worry that puts the lines on a free citizen.
ReplyDelete