Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Astrology

Expand Messages
  • Jeffrey Tesch
    My report on Watter s reading of Lizzie s chart was just a cursory overview. She went into copious detail about planetary alignment and moons in 9 degrees of
    Message 1 of 2 , Sep 14, 2006
    • 0 Attachment

      My report on Watter’s reading of Lizzie’s chart was just a cursory overview. She went into copious detail about planetary alignment and moons in 9 degrees of Pluto and etc.  I understood none of the logistics but found it fascinating anyway - her first chapter was an astrology 101 review that I skipped.

       

      I’m glad Muriel finally liked something I wrote – nice to know we share a complete ignorance of astrology.

       

      Not sure why June’s hackles got raised – but Barbara Watter’s has solid credentials:  4 books published, over 100 articles, and apparently advisor to at least one president. 

       

      June said a few weeks back that I liked to pontificate.  Maybe so, but at least I don’t harangue, dogmatize, preach, lecture, or sermonize – got to draw the line somewhere… (-.-)

       

      The pontification comment was regarding the Lindbergh case discussion.   I visited the Hopewell crime scene back in 1984 (took a detour on a business trip to Piscataway) – walked the grounds, took pictures, even stood by the window in the baby’s room.    There’s no way one man on a ladder could have backed out that window carrying a large toddler (18 months).  But the baby could easily have been spirited away down that back staircase…

       

      And memo to Laura James:  Thanks for including my top ten list in your recent True Crime Blog.  I’m glad that I “so kindly failed to object” when you asked my permission to cut and paste.  And nice disclaimer – I wouldn’t want my “subjective conjecture” to reflect the opinions of 40 Whacks or endorse any theory on behalf of same.

       

      I had another Top Ten posting on 12-18-2005:  Can you use that one?

       

      JT

       

       

    • Muriel Arnold
      JT: Which one? Clinton? JT, you said that:
      Message 2 of 2 , Sep 17, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        JT:
        < "...Babara Watter's has solid credential...and [she is or was] apparently adviser to at least one president." >
         Which one?   Clinton?
         
        JT, you said that: <"...at least I don't harangue, dogmatize, preach, lecture, or sermonize...>
        No offense but, this sounds like an exact replica of Hosea Knowlton.  Knowlton was quick to react to any criticism made against him, no matter how slight.  Knowlton was intelligent and extremely ambitious.  As proof, all you need do is read his summation at the trial.  Through sheer force of oratory, he just about demanded that the jury ignore the evidence and convict Lizzie on his say-so alone.  I claim Lizzie died never knowing she owed her freedom  to Justice Justin Dewey. 
         
        The reporters had made mention of Dewey having taken copious notes during the trial.  I've always wondered how it was decided as to who would give the Charge to the Jury.  Did the judges flip a coin, or did Dewey say:  "I want him, he's mine.  He may have gotten Blaisdell to find Lizzie probably guilty, not me." 
        Have a great day people.
        Muriel
         
         
         
         
        --- Original Message -----
        Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 11:35 PM
        Subject: [40Whacks] Astrology

        My report on Watter’s reading of Lizzie’s chart was just a cursory overview. She went into copious detail about planetary alignment and moons in 9 degrees of Pluto and etc.  I understood none of the logistics but found it fascinating anyway - her first chapter was an astrology 101 review that I skipped.

         

        I’m glad Muriel finally liked something I wrote – nice to know we share a complete ignorance of astrology.

         

        Not sure why June’s hackles got raised – but Barbara Watter’s has solid credentials:  4 books published, over 100 articles, and apparently advisor to at least one president. 

         

        June said a few weeks back that I liked to pontificate.  Maybe so, but at least I don’t harangue, dogmatize, preach, lecture, or sermonize – got to draw the line somewhere… (-.-)

         

        The pontification comment was regarding the Lindbergh case discussion.   I visited the Hopewell crime scene back in 1984 (took a detour on a business trip to Piscataway) – walked the grounds, took pictures, even stood by the window in the baby’s room.    There’s no way one man on a ladder could have backed out that window carrying a large toddler (18 months).  But the baby could easily have been spirited away down that back staircase…

         

        And memo to Laura James:  Thanks for including my top ten list in your recent True Crime Blog.  I’m glad that I “so kindly failed to object” when you asked my permission to cut and paste.  And nice disclaimer – I wouldn’t want my “subjective conjecture” to reflect the opinions of 40 Whacks or endorse any theory on behalf of same.

         

        I had another Top Ten posting on 12-18-2005:  Can you use that one?

         

        JT

         

         

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.