 |
||
|
“Charlene has become the point of ridicule
lately….” Nancy
Lieder The
Charlene Incident. (The inference method.) As
I’ve already explained Charlene frequented sci-astro as well as TT,
only she adopted a more “good-cop/bad-cop approach, not believing
100%, which to Nancy’s annoyance drew more assistance than her “I’m
better than you, I’ll post but not bother replying to any follow-ups”
attitude. However, Charlene made a wrong statement concerning viewing
specs of Nancy’s 12th planet to which the sci-astro crowd
went to town ridiculing her expertise. (Anyhow this is how it went down
and remember we also hadn’t got much of a clue what it was all about,
not wanting anything to do with sci-astro. We just knew her from her
activities on TT.) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tt-watch/message/4605
From:
Nancy
Lieder zetatalk@z...
Date:
Wed
Jun 20, 2001 9:00 pm
Subject:
Charlene in sci.astro :-)
Doing
a good job draining energy away from the adolescents. She's pointed,
knows her science and uses it, and is at them like a swam of nats.
Thanks
:-)
------o------ As
you can see prior to June Nancy thought Charlene was wonderful, until
she crossed swords with another zeta-faithful, JosX over on sci-astro,
then things changed dramatically. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tt-watch/message/4749 Date: Sun Jul 1, 2001 7:50 pm Subject: Charlene Exposed? [Notice the subject title “Charlene Exposed”? Already inferring she’s done something wrong.] Charlene
has become the point of ridicule lately, as well as an accusation by
Josh (on the /usenet/ web site) where he details why he thinks she is
actually working against ZetaTalk. There are others also questioning how
she could state she has a DoD contract, two employees besides herself,
working in computers and infrared, and be such a flake! Here's something
I just posted, under the thread Re: Charlene Exposed. What gives,
Charlene? In
support of Josh, wherein he stated: In Article <9hdf4m$pc1$1@n... >Josh
wrote: You
say you are looking at P-X with your own scope, and saying you cannot
see it.
------o------ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tt-watch/message/4751 From: Nancy Lieder <zetatalk@z... Date: Sun Jul 1, 2001 9:34 pm Subject: Re: [tt-watch] Charlene Exposed?
use00898.htm
where the WRONG guy she supports shows his stuff use00867.htm
also
use00900.htm
where she insults a Zeta premise in order to answer her professor Now,
below is what Josh wrote (use00931) and my comments. He does not include
that her thesis is a Zeta premise, almost entirely, and even mentions
the June coordinates given by the Zetas, with absolutely no mention of
the SOURCE. There's a name for this. Also, she lists in her web site
thesis a challenge by her prof, which she needs an answer to, and GETS,
from the Zetas on sci.astro debates following.
<Josh
wrote: I
hope everybody can see this "Charlane" is just trying to
control the discussion from the other side (from what is purported to be
the ZetaTalk-side), together with the other openly-anti-ZetaTalk
trolls.>
To
clarify, Charlene
does NOT speak for ZetaTalk,
nor should her interpretations be taken as having an official stamp of
approval from me. [Charlene
never once made out she spoke on behalf of Zetatalk or TT. Indeed if you
read her postings you can see she is there for herself. Although through
inference Nancy is now trying to make the tt-membership believe she
was.] She
is just one of hundreds of individuals noisy about having discovered the
ZetaTalk site and anxious to sight the inbound Planet X themselves.
She's stepping onto this Usenet and entered the discussion on her own
accord, something I didn't ask her to do as I've
not asked ANYONE to speak for me or fight my battles,
but she's in there slugging it out with those who scream
"crazy" and "stupid" and resort to character
assassination as step one. [Not
true during the Sol incident she specifically mentions needing help and
during recent sci-astro debates J W Dell specifically states he is
speaking on behalf of Nancy and TT.] If
you want to know what the Zetas have said, READ IT ON THE WEB SITE (http://www.zetatalk.com).
If you want to know what I have stated during these debates, pick it up
from the Usenet postings I've put on the ZetaTalk web site (http://www.zetatalk.com/usenet/use20011.htm) [Now
whe brings the official Zeta material in the argument knowing the
faithfull, if not believing Nancy, will believe the STO Zetas.] I've
found the postings by
The Small Kahuna,
J. William Dell,
Jimmy Joe, and Josh
to be solidly and consistently grounded, and there are other level
headed individuals too. [J
W Dell just won the October “Kook” award on sci-astro for his
stupidity and ignorance and Josh (JoshX) was ridiculed from the start.
Charlene was the only one, up until this mistake getting anywhere.] But
there are others who have read or heard the Zeta information and mix it
in with other information, or blur it because of their agenda or the
stance they must take in public life. Charlene works for the DoD, under
contract, and thus would be loathe to stray too far from espoused
stances of the establishment, I suspect. This does not make her
insincere, it just gives her conflicting motives.
There
are people who lose it when the Zetas are yet again highly accurate, as
when Planet X was sighted at the exact coordinates or crop shortages
clicked in the year the Zetas predicted. At those times they noisily
declare that the ZetaTalk Accuracy TOPIC [Josh
insisted Nancy drop Troubled Times and the Inc and caused one hell of a
stink over on sci-astro and the tt-groups, because she refused. Does
this not constitute what she describes above. Yet she did not publicly
denounce Josh.]
NASA
says ... or Sitchin says ... or some analysis by this person or that
says ... and this is encouraged on tt-watch as the premise is
"whether" basically, but when these other explanations are
examined they hold water ONLY when removed from most of the facts. -
hoping its not true but mentally preparing in case it is. The most
common reaction.
·
trying
to become the spokesperson - try to make the group look
"crazy" by association
·
try
distracting discussion that makes the serious members lose patience and
drop out
·
insert
characteristics that would make the mailing list a threat" (become
a militia, etc)
·
attempt
to change the premise and purpose of the group
[Again
though inference, quoting specific Zeta chapter and verse Nancy is
trying to make the situation and circumstances fit, turning an error
into “official debunking.” Hence the Zetas say so it must be so.] ------o------ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tt-watch/message/4792 Date: Mon Jul 2, 2001 7:22 pm Subject: Re: [tt-watch] Re: Charlene Exposed?
>>
The moron calling itself Small Kahuna wrote: Quit
whining. I do it to make a point and draw attention to what follows.
[Plagiarism
is basically stealing someone’s ideas/words and passing them off as
your own. Charlene just doesn’t mention Zetatalk. If she was in breech
of any Zeta copyright Nancy would have took her to court , I can
guarantee that. She’s attempting to slur her character by making her
appear as a thief, inference again.] Charlene
referred to her web site http://members.aol.com/greentek/planet.htm,
titled "Sudden Planetary Magnetic Reaction in Orbit and the
Argument for This Planet's Shifting of Magnetic North by Greater than 25
degrees As Presented and Theorized by Charlane Meyer-Miller, CEO -
GreenTek Unlimited Concepts, INC. (DoD)" in response to the Zetas
stating that outside of perturbations planet ORBITS are not affected by
the approach or passage of Planet X, where a slowing rotation does
occur. On this page Charlene references Sitchin but fails to mention
ZetaTalk for whatever reason, even though the coordinates (RA and Dec)
given on this page for June are those recently posted by the Zetas.
Perhaps this is for credibility purposes, though if you're going to use
Zeta given information as a premise, you're going to inevitably be asked
WHERE you got this information from, and there you are anyway, at the
ZetaTalk site, staring at those big eye'd, big brained guys. I can't
quote this web page as it is tightly copyrighted, but will quote an
argument QUOTED there from a professor who states that Planet X would
sling the Earth into a different orbit. She apparently wants a response
to this professor, which the Zetas are willing to do, here on this very
public Usenet.
Your
ideas are very interesting, but you haven't yet discussed some important
effects that are more observable. For instance, if Planet X passed close
enough to affect the Earth magnetically, then its gravitational
attraction would be strong enough to pull [So
she’s a skeptic, good for her.] ------o------ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tt-watch/message/4793 From: Nancy Lieder <zetatalk@z...> Date: Mon Jul 2, 2001 7:20 pm Subject: Re: [tt-watch] Re: Charlene Exposed?
[Rubbish.
I was one of those who asked that same question, as copyright will be no
good after May 2003 if the 12th planet turns up. It stopped
because she wouldn’t give a straight answer. It’s supposed to be
about getting out “the word” so who cares who does it so long as
people get to hear. Besides Nancy and her faithful do a better job of
discrediting Zetatalk than anyone else could.] There
was even a site that Gerard found where one could pose their questions
to the Zetas and get a response. During that same period, Robert
Ghostwolf (who is not at all an Indian nor is he claimed by any American
Indian groups, but has a history of prosecutions for fraud) went onto
the Art Bell show and stated his Indian ancestors has stated 2003 as the
year of impact.
[All
Charlene got was earache, Has the 12th turned up? Has she
been acclaimed for its discovery? Besides the first person to see it
usually gets that privelage.] Anytime
something is taken from another without crediting, there ismischief
afoot. It can't last, will be found out eventually, so why doit? You
think she'd get a Masters with those RA and Dec without beingasked where
they came from? It's not for a Masters, then what is itfor? Something is
VERY wrong here, and does not hold together. [More
inference, Charlene’s taken nothing.] mikepip@a...
wrote: >Also,
you question why she doesn't list you as a source or your site, and why
she is using a theory on her site that is Zeta information? This is
obvious; because at this point most reputable scientist think you're
nuts Nancy.< ------o------
Date: Mon Jul 2, 2001 7:04 pm Subject: Re: [tt-watch] Re: Charlene Exposed?
>Interesting
that you see it that way. I have been reading sci.astro and Charlane
seems to be fully supporting ZetaTalk.< [Notice
how she repeats the same inferences so that anyone who might have missed
it can pick up on it. However its also a good means of repetitive
manipulation.] ------o------
Date: Mon Jul 2, 2001 7:15 pm Subject: Re: [tt-watch] Charlene Exposed?
[Green
Tek is Charlene.] >According
to the planisphere for my longitude and latitude, it's not.< Its
not visible in the Northern hemisphere at night (when it is dark and can
be seen) until the Fall, my understanding. Per my SkyMap program, it
comes up in the EAST (in the Sun) about 4:30-5:00 AM. This is considered
"in the Sun", making it impossible to see. You stated, in your
entry into sci.astro, "I'm here, Nancy, on your behalf." and
then procede to sabotage Steve Havas (casting doubts on his observatory
documentation). You're stating you're "still looking" when
going about it in a way that is impossible to see, making those who did
SERIOUS and INTELLIGENT looking look rediculous by grouping yourself
with them! This is not a help, as I'm sure you know. Wrong.
The Zetas said that an OBSERVATORY level scope was required, repeatedly
stated this. Stated this in the summaries they have been posting.
Repeatedly. Stated this in the arguments and discussions on magnitude
and size, endlessly. Observatory grade scopes do MAGNIFICATION, so it
can be seen as other than a few pixtels across.
[Why
should she? It’s a free country so Charlene can go where she likes and
say wjat she wants. Why should she stop because Nancy says? Because
Nancy thinks she is God.] >
As for Josh, he has good points but for some reason I antagonize
him.< He's
deeply intelligent and is an independent thinker.
Charlene, you're acting too flaky to be a
DoD contractor in a scientific/technical field. Or maybe I overestimate
the quality of DoD contractors. If you operated there like you're
operating here, they'd not have done more than read you intro letter!
Something is VERY wrong here! [So
much intelligent he’s just recently denounced Nancy and Zetatalk.
Again note the slurring character.] >
He has his own set of problems.> Wrong.
His points are valid. Solidly so. [That’s
why he insisted you disband the TT-Inc and all the profit side of
Yroubled Times and Nancy listened then as well.] >Dr.
Tholen, as I was told by some of his associates separately, is not even
taken seriously because he is performing the attacks personally and
they know it.<
[Again
very clever hinting Charlene has science /technology connections in DoD
work, but nothing to do with astronomy of which Charlene freely admits
being ignorant.]
[Nancy
has never had a serious debate on sci-astro. All she does is post and
run. Claiming some Zeta victory or 100% accuracy, but she never debates
any replies or rebuttles. Hark at the pan calling the kettle black.] ------o------
Date: Tue Jul 3, 2001 1:49 am Subject: Re: Charlene, etc.
Re:
Some Thoughts on Planet X Date:
2001-06-20 20:06:27 PST
What
was the name of this supposed corporation you created? How
credible are you?
------o------ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tt-watch/message/4818 From: Nancy Lieder <zetatalk@z...> Date: Tue Jul 3, 2001 1:50 am Subject: Re: Charlene, etc.
Date:
2001-06-16 05:33:43 PST
Regardless,
this monster is elusive by any means.
------o------ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tt-watch/message/4819 Date: Tue Jul 3, 2001 1:45 am Subject: Re: Charlene, etc.
Re:
Planet X: JULY-SEPT, 2001 Coordinates Date:
2001-06-19 07:45:08 PST
Charlane [God
talk about a dog and its bone. What does Nancy think she’s
discovered?] ------o------
Date: Tue Jul 3, 2001 1:52 am Subject: Re: Charlene, etc.
...... Date:
2001-06-25 20:14:19 PST Subject:
Re: Planet X: EARTHQUAKE Increase
Date:
6/25/01 3:20 PM Pacific Daylight Time Message-id:
<3B37B93A.C38DEFD9@i...>
Charlane [Wow
definite government agency stuff Charlene’s being nice to someone on
sci-astro. You’d never catch Nancy doing anything as silly as that.] ------o------ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tt-watch/message/4821 Date: Tue Jul 3, 2001 1:53 am Subject: Re: Charlene, etc.
........ Date:
2001-06-20 11:53:16 PST
>
Wow, Nancy must be hitting some sore spots because she has presented
some pretty interesting subjects backed up with meaningful data<
Date:
2001-06-27 12:00:01 PST
From:
tholen@A... Date:
6/27/2001 1:39 PM Central Daylight Time Message-id:
<gLp_6.19249$WI.6124548@t...>
>If
my description sounds familiar to what Nancy has previously described
how it would look like then what's the problem with that?<
------o------ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tt-watch/message/4822 From: Nancy Lieder <zetatalk@z...> Date: Tue Jul 3, 2001 2:20 am Subject: The Threatening Message
[First
off the Zryas have pinpointed nothing as no one has found or located the
12th planet at those co-ordinates. Second, “telling it like
it is and no lie. The Zeta’s have just admitted to deception and lying
as far back as 1996 so I think that counts as two contradictions on the
part of Nancy.] Control
freaks like the DoD? The good old FBI that shot a mother with a baby in
her arms because she lived with someone who advocated breaking away from
the US? The good old CIA who ran cocaine in the Iran Contra days and
considered this a good tradeoff? They'd just sit back and do nothing? [Catering
companies and stationary supplies work for the DoD does that make them
part of some espionage ring? Plus I hardly think some government
conspiracy would arrive announcing its qualifications with the CIA,
although its possible, I suppose.] At
the very least, if they cannot kill me (and this does get blocked), they
have plan A through Z of how to reduce my influence. This goes alongside
of wanting to get the word out to folks via ZetaTalk, because its
deniable. They sit with wet armpits while I post on sci.astro. They want
to throw a frog in the pot every now and then, especially when ZetaTalk
seems to be impressing folks. [I
know quite a few on sci-astro that would dearly love for the CIA to turn
up and silence Nancy. However its not happened yet but we can all live
in hope.] I
posted, on sci.astro recently (/use00931.htm) a brief description of
disinfo attempts experienced in the past. This is a very small subset,
folks, as I frankly know of dozens more, some lying quiescent waiting to
be activated, but say nothing so as not to sound too much like a
conspiracy freak. In this posting, I listed only those KNOWN
to the
group,
at least to those who have been around for awhile. [Known
to the group so she can infer that Charlene falls into their catagories.] If
I'm being unkind to Charlene to ask her why she's been looking into the
sun as it rises and
implying that Steve is a fool and befuddler
and cozzling up to a vicious basher who posts no worth whatsoever, then
I appologize. [But
Steve us a fool and a liar and with the concerted propaganda so far that
apology sounds a little hollow don’t you think?] Regardless,
this is not HELPING, and if we hold the hand of everyone who
"says" they are helping, when they're not, then we're a real
easy take-down! ZetaTalk would not have lasted 3 months, in 1995, if I
were that much of a gof to be led about and put off. People judge you by
your associates, by the integrity of your posts,
and Steve Havas is a STAR
in this regard. [Steve
Havas was laughed off sci-astro. He still won’t answer his critics on
his visual sighting.] Charlene,
whatever her intents, will do us a favor by NOT helping us. Now I'll
list the disinfo tactics, again, and see how many of them fit (noted
with an *). If a friend, and she may well be, then she's hurting us
regardless. If a foe, then they aimed right
as this tt-watch is totally
immersed in screaching right now. Plus, with two ex-DoD guys the
mainstay in tt-posse, she'd be guaranteed a long leash out of sympathy,
so someone might have guessed right on this, too.
[Notice
how she’s elaborating on the foe aspect more than the friend.] Try
to think like an enemy. How would you muster an attack? Below, my list
of tactics. By my count, this latest has accomplished 4 of 6. And
begging your pardon, Chalene, if I've misjudged you at all, but this
could all be for the price, perhaps, of a new 5 year contract to the DoD.
This is how very EASY is would be for the CIA/FBI/DoD to ease their
nervousness, here. [Scored
4 of 6 by Nancy’s standards. Now this is enough to damn her to the
Zeta faithful.] ·
try
to insert new "leadership" ·
trying
to become the spokesperson ·
try
to make the group look "crazy" by association ·
try
distracting discussion that makes the serious members lose patience and
drop out - insert characteristics that would make the mailing list a [Trial
by Nancy – Guilty by inference.] ------o------
From: Nancy Lieder <zetatalk@z...> Date: Wed Jul 4, 2001 11:12 pm Subject: Re: [tt-watch] Nancy & ZetaTalk support
[Last
post because tt-posse has told Nancy to pack in the witch-hunt, as her
obsession is showing.] ------o------ Charlene
quit soon after and who could blame her.
|