Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools (WWASPS) => Topic started by: Anonymous on June 25, 2006, 01:51:00 PM
-
cafety.org
caica.org
youthrights.org
tbfight.com
nospank.net
teenadvocatesusa.org
isaccorp.org
astart.com
Voy Forums
Lemondor
Heal Online
Swat the WWASP
Anti WWASP
WHY IS IT TEEN ADVOCATES AND ISAC HAVE NO recent articles, stories, current events, any information on the largest organization of alleged child abuse neglect parent fraud - WWASP and WWASPS?
Shelby, Barbe, care to answer? Some people do find it strange.
-
Teen Advocates USA is not a watchdog group and ISAC, which is maintains an extensive database of material relevant to many many programs, including WWASPS.
Their news articles page has WWASPS related articles.
http://isaccorp.org/articles.html (http://isaccorp.org/articles.html)
Now, how come CAICA has nothing on Whitmore or PURE? And what's with their LAME facility watchlist?
LOL - best be careful what you wish for, ANON.
It ain't always what it looks like.
:wave:
-
The operative word here is RECENT news articles, for example where is the Joanne Green story ROUGH LOVE from the Miami New Times and the TAKING A BEATING article from the Missoula Independent? Why no recent articles about WWASP? Care to answer, Shelby Barbe? SMells like someone sold out to me. It seems you people are just obsessed with the PURE/WHITMORE/CAICA.WWASP is far wider spread than Whitmore or PURE could ever dream to be. You all are obsessing as usual and very non-productive. but it feeds your egos and WWASP spies and makes you all feel better. i htink people should really ask these questions, and get some answers.
-
WTF are you talking about ANON?
Sounds like YOU are the one confused.
Why don't you ask CAICA some important questions like why their facility watchlist doesn't have the name of a program where the co-owner has been charged with child abuse and is going to trial in September?
Can you name any other program that should be on a watchlist? IIRC, the program (Whitmore) is still operating. Is this correct? If so, shouldn't other parents at least know about it?
If not, why not? Please explain ANON. Seems like everybody wants charges brought against alleged abused programs but when it happens, it ain't news?
That's fucked up my friend.
-
Sure is fucked up.
Sue Scheff PURE supports the Sudweeks, and Cheryl Sudweeks's criminal trial for abusing 4 children begings September 2006.
CAICA supports Sue Scheff PURE.
CAICA does not have one single thing on Whitmore on CAICA and this is a CRIMINAL TRIAL for abusing innocent children.
And let's not forget WHO GOT PAID FOR REFERRING those children to Whitmore Academy---you got it, SUE SCHEFF / PURE.
Something sure does stink here.
-
WWASP may be "wider spread" but WHEN WAS THERE A CRIMINAL TRIAL scheduled against one WWASP employee for abusing a child?
WHEN?
-
On 2006-06-25 12:34:00, Anonymous wrote:
"WWASP may be "wider spread" but WHEN WAS THERE A CRIMINAL TRIAL scheduled against one WWASP employee for abusing a child?
WHEN?"
Hmmm, that's a good question. Don't think there ever has been one. At least that I have ever heard about.
Lots of articles but no trial, except civil lawsuits, right?
-
Has a civil lawsuit EVER actually gone to trail?
Don't think so.
-
tial, that is.
-
On 2006-06-25 11:35:00, Anonymous wrote:
"The operative word here is RECENT news articles, for example where is the Joanne Green story ROUGH LOVE from the Miami New Times and the TAKING A BEATING article from the Missoula Independent? Why no recent articles about WWASP? Care to answer, Shelby Barbe? SMells like someone sold out to me. It seems you people are just obsessed with the PURE/WHITMORE/CAICA.WWASP is far wider spread than Whitmore or PURE could ever dream to be. You all are obsessing as usual and very non-productive. but it feeds your egos and WWASP spies and makes you all feel better. i htink people should really ask these questions, and get some answers."
Back in the ole days when PURE was calling itself a non-profit foundation, I could see people being confused about what PURE was (I think they even had a different name??)
But that was quite awhile ago. What's IZZIE's excuse? This is 2006. PURE RESULTS? WTF does that mean????
::kma::
-
WTF
THIS TOPIC IS "TEEN ADVOCATES USA / ISAC" AND A QUESTION WAS ASKED ABOUT WHY THEY DON'T POST RECENT ARTICLES. LET'S NARROW THIS DOWN, AND MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, SOMEONE WILL STAY ON TOPIC AND WILL ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS.
TEEN ADVOCATES - WHY HAS BARBE FOR THE LONGEST TIME NOT MENTIONED ANYTHING ON HER WEBSITE ABOUT THE LARGEST, THE ALLEDGEDLY MOST ABUSIVE, PROGRAM OUT THERE - WWASP? WHY?
ISAC - THE LINK THE ANON PROVIDED IS NICE BUT THIS LINK MAKES IT EVIDENT THAT THERE IS NOT ONE ARTICLE LISTED ON THAT PAGE ABOUT WWASP.
REMEMBER, CARIE BOCK GOT $12,500 FROM WWASP - HMMM. COULD THERE BE MORE SELL-OUTS?
FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO WILL CONTINUE WITH YOUR OBSESSION ABOUT SUE/PURE/CAICA/WHITMORE/IZZIE, ETC., FEEL FREE TO CONTINUE BUT PLEASE ANSWER THE QUESTION. INQUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW.
-
On 2006-06-25 15:16:00, Anonymous wrote:
"WTF
THIS TOPIC IS "TEEN ADVOCATES USA / ISAC" AND A QUESTION WAS ASKED ABOUT WHY THEY DON'T POST RECENT ARTICLES. LET'S NARROW THIS DOWN, AND MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, SOMEONE WILL STAY ON TOPIC AND WILL ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS.
TEEN ADVOCATES - WHY HAS BARBE FOR THE LONGEST TIME NOT MENTIONED ANYTHING ON HER WEBSITE ABOUT THE LARGEST, THE ALLEDGEDLY MOST ABUSIVE, PROGRAM OUT THERE - WWASP? WHY?
ISAC - THE LINK THE ANON PROVIDED IS NICE BUT THIS LINK MAKES IT EVIDENT THAT THERE IS NOT ONE ARTICLE LISTED ON THAT PAGE ABOUT WWASP.
REMEMBER, CARIE BOCK GOT $12,500 FROM WWASP - HMMM. COULD THERE BE MORE SELL-OUTS?
FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO WILL CONTINUE WITH YOUR OBSESSION ABOUT SUE/PURE/CAICA/WHITMORE/IZZIE, ETC., FEEL FREE TO CONTINUE BUT PLEASE ANSWER THE QUESTION. INQUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW. "
Izzat chu, Lizzie?
-
I don't know anything personally about what ISAC or TAUSA posts on their websites.
But, I would like to know why Isabelle at CAICA lied and said I requested that she remove Whitmore from CAICA.
Isabelle claims to be a child advocate, and I believe any true child advocate would want the public to be aware that the owner of Whitmore Academy has been charged with criminal child abuse and is facing a criminal trial for abusing 4 children in September 2006.
This issue at Whitmore has nothing to do with ISAC or TAUSA.
I would like for Isablelle to answer thses direct question: Why isn't Whitmore Academy on her Watchlist at CAICA? Why doesn't Isabelle do the RIGHT thing and let the public know that Whitmore Academy's owner, Cheryl Sudweeks is facing a criminal trial in September?
-
The Anon typing all in CAPS.
What do you mean by "sell out" when you refer to ISAC and TAUSA and refer to Carey Bock "selling out?" What are you talking about?
-
I'm not going anywhere near that one. :lol:
Oh god. Long story and I don't really know all the details. Anyone else out there able to condense it into something coherent?
-
Mr./Miss CAPS brought it up. Let that person explain the accusation. Sounds all nasty, anyway.
-
On 2006-06-25 19:27:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Mr./Miss CAPS brought it up. Let that person explain the accusation.
I'm sure they will when they see it. I'm not stopping them.
Sounds all nasty, anyway."
It is.
-
On CAICA's litigation page Isabelle has the "Litchfield vs ISAC" case listed. So, it certainly does not appear that ISAC is friendly with WWASP. THE MAN is suing ISAC for Christ's sake!
-
What the hell does Carey Bock have to do with ISAC or TAUSA? Carey was part of that Trekkers group, some of whom were also supportive of PURE.
There was a several months long bashing fest on Fornits that got pretty heated with both sides making allegations.
Unfortunately, what could and should have been resolved with far less hurling of vile, ugly name-calling and threats, turned into a fucking mess.
WWASPS and PURE are competitors, that's the bottom line. WWASPS parents refer to WWASPS, PURE refers to NON-WWASPS programs, but Scheff was a long time referrer to WWASPS, even after she started her own company PURE. That's my understanding of it, anyway, my apologies if not completely accurate.
Do a WWF search. It's all there for posterity, and I suppose, to keep the record straight as to the he/said/she/said debaccle.
My experience is many people moved on from the WWASPS debate once they figured out who was really benefiting.
It simply wasn't worth it. Other programs (and deaths) were being ignored (HLA, CEDU, Skyline Journey, Red Rock where Katie Lank, died, etc.
:smokin:
-
Sorry if I didn't make this clear - the bashing fest had to do with Bock, the Trekkers and PURE.
-
Bottom line: Why does Izzy at CAICA support Sue Scheff/PURE who is supportive of the Sudweeks at Whitmore Academy who are facing a criminal child abuse trial?
Sounds like CAICA is supporting an abusive facility if you ask me.
-
On 2006-06-25 20:35:00, Anonymous wrote:
"What the hell does Carey Bock have to do with ISAC or TAUSA? Carey was part of that Trekkers group, some of whom were also supportive of PURE.
There was a several months long bashing fest on Fornits that got pretty heated with both sides making allegations.
Unfortunately, what could and should have been resolved with far less hurling of vile, ugly name-calling and threats, turned into a fucking mess.
WWASPS and PURE are competitors, that's the bottom line. WWASPS parents refer to WWASPS, PURE refers to NON-WWASPS programs, but Scheff was a long time referrer to WWASPS, even after she started her own company PURE. That's my understanding of it, anyway, my apologies if not completely accurate.
Do a WWF search. It's all there for posterity, and I suppose, to keep the record straight as to the he/said/she/said debaccle.
My experience is many people moved on from the WWASPS debate once they figured out who was really benefiting.
It simply wasn't worth it. Other programs (and deaths) were being ignored (HLA, CEDU, Skyline Journey, Red Rock where Katie Lank, died, etc.
::bangin::
-
On 2006-06-25 20:54:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Bottom line: Why does Izzy at CAICA support Sue Scheff/PURE who is supportive of the Sudweeks at Whitmore Academy who are facing a criminal child abuse trial?
Sounds like CAICA is supporting an abusive facility if you ask me."
Totally sucks, if ya ask me!
::puke::
-
Some people might be wise to tell their "friend" HEY, I'm not posting THAT, you post it!
-
On 2006-06-25 20:54:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Bottom line: Why does Izzy at CAICA support Sue Scheff/PURE who is supportive of the Sudweeks at Whitmore Academy who are facing a criminal child abuse trial?
Sounds like CAICA is supporting an abusive facility if you ask me."
Okay, this is a fair question. What is the basis of this relationship between CAICA and PURE? Maybe then you can figure out why she won't support the Whitmore parents and especially their children?
:???:
-
I have no idea what the relationship is between Scheff and Isabelle at CAICA.
I do know that Scheff was very displeased with the Statement we made to ISAC, because we stated our displeasure with Scheff's/PURE referral to the abusive Whitmore Academy.
Isabelle had published the ISAC Statement on CAICA. I would ASSUME that Sue Scheff was not pleased about having the ISAC Statement published on CAICA.
You would have to ask Isabelle and Sue Scheff if this has anything to do with CAICA not having Whitmore on the CAICA "watchlist" or with Isabelle not supporting the Whitmore parents and children.
Again, I DID NOT request that Isabelle remove Whitmore Academy from her website.
-
On 2006-06-25 21:24:00, Joyce Harris wrote:
"I have no idea what the relationship is between Scheff and Isabelle at CAICA.
I do know that Scheff was very displeased with the Statement we made to ISAC, because we stated our displeasure with Scheff's/PURE referral to the abusive Whitmore Academy.
Isabelle had published the ISAC Statement on CAICA. I would ASSUME that Sue Scheff was not pleased about having the ISAC Statement published on CAICA.
You would have to ask Isabelle and Sue Scheff if this has anything to do with CAICA not having Whitmore on the CAICA "watchlist" or with Isabelle not supporting the Whitmore parents and children.
Again, I DID NOT request that Isabelle remove Whitmore Academy from her website.
"
Perhaps Isabelle should revisit this issue? Second thought, why is it even an issue? The state of Utah brought charges against Whitmore.
Doesn't matter how she feels about PURE, she needs to stand behind her personal statement of why she founded CAICA .. something about being the most accurate.
No issue that I can see. There is a trial forthcoming. Other advocacy groups will be monitoring it, I'm sure.
-
Izzy's statements should be interesting IF or WHEN Sue Scheff is deposed in EITHER the Whitmore criminal or civil case. Sue Scheff's close connection to each of the children in both cases MAY be of interest to all parties, since she is directly responsible for the enrollment of most, if not ALL the children.
Based on Sue Scheff's depositions in the WWASP vs PURE case, things could get interesting, IF she is deposed in EITHER case. Not saying she will be; but she appears to be a major player.
-
On 2006-06-25 21:43:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Izzy's statements should be interesting IF or WHEN Sue Scheff is deposed in EITHER the Whitmore criminal or civil case. Sue Scheff's close connection to each of the children in both cases MAY be of interest to all parties, since she is directly responsible for the enrollment of most, if not ALL the children.
Based on Sue Scheff's depositions in the WWASP vs PURE case, things could get interesting, IF she is deposed in EITHER case. Not saying she will be; but she appears to be a major player."
:eek:
-
Scheff's WWASP Deposition is riddled with LIES:
Said she had a degree---LIE
Said she had attorney and psychologists on PURE Staff---well, attorneys/psychologists DID have offices in the SAME building with her! ha!
Said she had experience in the MEDICAL FIELD---she answered the phone at some medical establishment, or some such nonsense.
Can use the "Search WWF" and read it.
So new depositions from this lady could be something else; if Scheff is called to give any depositions.
-
On 2006-06-25 21:58:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-06-25 21:43:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Izzy's statements should be interesting IF or WHEN Sue Scheff is deposed in EITHER the Whitmore criminal or civil case. Sue Scheff's close connection to each of the children in both cases MAY be of interest to all parties, since she is directly responsible for the enrollment of most, if not ALL the children.
Based on Sue Scheff's depositions in the WWASP vs PURE case, things could get interesting, IF she is deposed in EITHER case. Not saying she will be; but she appears to be a major player."
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
You have clearly never met Izzie, or listened to her odd, rambling diatribes. I wouldn't have her testify for me if she was the only witness alive. The CAICA website closed down for months because everyone who initially signed on discovered she was eccentric, to put it mildly.
-
On 2006-06-26 08:13:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-06-25 21:58:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-06-25 21:43:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Izzy's statements should be interesting IF or WHEN Sue Scheff is deposed in EITHER the Whitmore criminal or civil case. Sue Scheff's close connection to each of the children in both cases MAY be of interest to all parties, since she is directly responsible for the enrollment of most, if not ALL the children.
Based on Sue Scheff's depositions in the WWASP vs PURE case, things could get interesting, IF she is deposed in EITHER case. Not saying she will be; but she appears to be a major player."
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
You have clearly never met Izzie, or listened to her odd, rambling diatribes. I wouldn't have her testify for me if she was the only witness alive. The CAICA website closed down for months because everyone who initially signed on discovered she was eccentric, to put it mildly."
What do you mean "signed on"? Does this have something to do with the CAICA Non-Profit Board of Directors that was mentioned in that article about Spring Creek Lodge?
-
On 2006-06-26 08:50:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-06-26 08:13:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-06-25 21:58:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2006-06-25 21:43:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Izzy's statements should be interesting IF or WHEN Sue Scheff is deposed in EITHER the Whitmore criminal or civil case. Sue Scheff's close connection to each of the children in both cases MAY be of interest to all parties, since she is directly responsible for the enrollment of most, if not ALL the children.
Based on Sue Scheff's depositions in the WWASP vs PURE case, things could get interesting, IF she is deposed in EITHER case. Not saying she will be; but she appears to be a major player."
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
You have clearly never met Izzie, or listened to her odd, rambling diatribes. I wouldn't have her testify for me if she was the only witness alive. The CAICA website closed down for months because everyone who initially signed on discovered she was eccentric, to put it mildly."
What do you mean "signed on"? Does this have something to do with the CAICA Non-Profit Board of Directors that was mentioned in that article about Spring Creek Lodge?"
Groups like the Coalition Against Institutionalized Child Abuse (CAICA) and the International Survivors Action Committee (ISAC) are working on community awareness and outreach to educate parents, legislators, and legal and health professionals on the tactics used by teen programs.
Sen. Trudi Schmidt now sits on the board of directors for the newly formed CAICA.
http://www.caica.org/NEWS%20SCL%20Short ... -16-05.htm (http://www.caica.org/NEWS%20SCL%20Short%20Leash%206-16-05.htm)
-
There would be no reason for Izzy to be a witness in any case. But her "statments" about PURE might be interesting IF or WHEN Sue Scheff MIGHT (or MIGHT NOT) be deposed in the Whitmore cases. Could be a way for Izzy to learn a few things about this business, and how things could possibly work when certain people start changing alliances.
-
On 2006-06-25 18:17:00, Joyce Harris wrote:
"I don't know anything personally about what ISAC or TAUSA posts on their websites.
But, I would like to know why Isabelle at CAICA lied and said I requested that she remove Whitmore from CAICA.
Isabelle claims to be a child advocate, and I believe any true child advocate would want the public to be aware that the owner of Whitmore Academy has been charged with criminal child abuse and is facing a criminal trial for abusing 4 children in September 2006.
This issue at Whitmore has nothing to do with ISAC or TAUSA.
I would like for Isablelle to answer thses direct question: Why isn't Whitmore Academy on her Watchlist at CAICA? Why doesn't Isabelle do the RIGHT thing and let the public know that Whitmore Academy's owner, Cheryl Sudweeks is facing a criminal trial in September?"
Hi Joyce,
While I'm here tonight I will address you - one time. I have not lied about why I took the Whitmore off my site. It is plain and very simple, and anyone who has bothered to ask has heard the same thing. You wrote me very annoying e-mails and I began to feel that I was being harrassed by you and asked that you stop. You finally did. One thing you said - you insisted I not post anything on my site with your daughter's name on it. I discussed this with several laywers and with board members, and we all agreed it was not worth having anything on the site that had to do with you or the Whitmore.
The Whitmore, as far as I know, is closed and there are no children there. I think that people need to stop obsessing about this - there is a trial coming up and things will get resolved there. There are so many other things everyone should be focused on right now, I just don't see how people have all this time to spend fixated on this one issue.
Anyway, this is it for me. I have things to do and do not want to engage in this madness.
Isabelle
-
Isabelle,
I told you: IF you published ANY COURT RECORDS regarding the Whitmore civil or criminal cases, that I did not want you to publish my minor daughter's name." That is all I requested from you.
You did state to people that I requested that you remove Whitmore from your website. If you do not remember stating this, I accept that you do not remember.
I DO NOT consider our exchange of emails to be harrassing in any manner. I accept that you may view my "correcting you" as not being pleasant; but "harrassment" is a legal term; and I in no way harrassed you. I merely documented to you that the people who you said "published the names of minor children on court documents; had answered my emails---and had informed me that they DID NOT publish the names of minor children without the parent's permission."
So, again, you have publicly accused me of harrassing you--when I did not such thing. I have stated, and restated what happened in our exchange of emails: It was as simple as I have stated it. You requested court documents from me; and I refused to supply them to you, stating my reason: I disapprove of your policy of posting minor children's names on court documents.. I did not harrass you; and you should not continue to say I did.
You have accused me publicly, and I believe I deserve a public apology. That seems only fair.
I want you to check your facts about "the Whitmore being closed, and there being no children there." Your source does not seem to be reliable.
You are correct: The Whitmore cases--both the criminal and civil cases, will be decided in the court systems. And, the public will continue to be made AWARE, with or without the assistance of CAICA.
You own CAICA, and you have the right to choose to support the Whitmore parents and their abused children, or not. Your decision really has nothing to do with me: my family is not a part of the criminal OR civil cases against the Sudweeks or Whitmore Academy.
You are correct: it is "madness." Child abuse usually is.
-
On 2006-06-27 22:06:00, MomCat wrote:
"
On 2006-06-25 18:17:00, Joyce Harris wrote:
"I don't know anything personally about what ISAC or TAUSA posts on their websites.
But, I would like to know why Isabelle at CAICA lied and said I requested that she remove Whitmore from CAICA.
Isabelle claims to be a child advocate, and I believe any true child advocate would want the public to be aware that the owner of Whitmore Academy has been charged with criminal child abuse and is facing a criminal trial for abusing 4 children in September 2006.
This issue at Whitmore has nothing to do with ISAC or TAUSA.
I would like for Isablelle to answer thses direct question: Why isn't Whitmore Academy on her Watchlist at CAICA? Why doesn't Isabelle do the RIGHT thing and let the public know that Whitmore Academy's owner, Cheryl Sudweeks is facing a criminal trial in September?"
Hi Joyce,
While I'm here tonight I will address you - one time. I have not lied about why I took the Whitmore off my site. It is plain and very simple, and anyone who has bothered to ask has heard the same thing. You wrote me very annoying e-mails and I began to feel that I was being harrassed by you and asked that you stop. You finally did. One thing you said - you insisted I not post anything on my site with your daughter's name on it. I discussed this with several laywers and with board members, and we all agreed it was not worth having anything on the site that had to do with you or the Whitmore.
The Whitmore, as far as I know, is closed and there are no children there. I think that people need to stop obsessing about this - there is a trial coming up and things will get resolved there. There are so many other things everyone should be focused on right now, I just don't see how people have all this time to spend fixated on this one issue.
Anyway, this is it for me. I have things to do and do not want to engage in this madness.
Isabelle"
Are you a 501 (c) corporation (non-profit)? If so, who are your board members? I don't think I have seen this on your website, just you and another lady named Kathy as being CAICA (see your disclaimer).
-
Izzy, why do you call the interest in the Whitmore criminal case an OBSESSION? Can you name ONE OTHER CRIMINAL CASE that is pending against a program owner?
The Whitmore case is critical, important. Surely you know that.
-
Sue and Paula told her those people were obsessing!
-
On 2006-06-27 23:00:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Izzy, why do you call the interest in the Whitmore criminal case an OBSESSION? Can you name ONE OTHER CRIMINAL CASE that is pending against a program owner?
The Whitmore case is critical, important. Surely you know that."
Sure is, but then again, Izzie is obsessing about people obsessing about things that matter not a whit to her.
:rofl:
-
IZZY: You have all those other CLOSED programs on your watchlist on CAICA.
So, what if you say Whitmore is closed and has no kids there? Why can't Whitmore be on the watchlist like all the other CLOSED programs you have on CAICA?
What's the difference? HUH?
-
Thought the OP question was answered:
TAUSA doesn't post articles about WWASP because it is not a watchdog site, and it was verified that ISAC does have articles published about WWASP.
Are you referring to the ridiculous allegation that TAUSA and ISAC have "sold out to WWASP" like Carey Bock? Seems to just be a ridiculous allegation; especially on the part of ISAC, since Robert Litchfield-WWASP is actively suing WWASP.
ODD too, that CAICA has the lawsuit posted, when ISAC didn't choose to post this lawsuit on its own website.
Makes one wonder just who is asking such ridiculous questions, right?
-
///WHY IS IT TEEN ADVOCATES AND ISAC HAVE NO recent articles, stories, current events, any information on the largest organization of alleged child abuse neglect parent fraud - WWASP and WWASPS?///
Barb does not deal with wwasp at all. She has her reasons. Her focus is different from that of say Fornits or ISAC or many others. Her site is beautifully done and very moving and I often refer others to it.
ISAC was at the Denver conference when all this news broke. Also - folks have lives, that must be lived.
If you have the time and inclination Anon - to be jhonny on the spot with every bit of news that comes out - by all means go for it. As I keep saying - the more the merrier. Or is this you IZZY - self promoting at others expense - again?
Suggesting anyone in either group is turning a blind eye is ridiculas in the extreme. Not worth debating. Anyone who could suggest such a thing is a trolling idiot.
-
Anyone who could suggest such a thing is a trolling idiot.
I concur.
-
Buzz, whoever this was did more than "suggest." This person asked if TAUSA and ISAC had "sold out to WWASP just like Carey Bock?" That is way more than suggesting. That is downright vile, viocious.
-
Izzy keeps throwing around the word "harrassment" She should know that is a legal word, and should apologize.
Some say she was a paralegal, some say only a legal secretary. Either way, or neither way--- she should know better than to accuse someone.
-
::smokingun::
some of us know the truth. we are genuinely disgusted.
-
What is the "TRUTH?" and why it is so well-hidden, if it is so "disgusting?"
-
On 2006-06-28 08:03:00, BuzzKill wrote:
Barb does not deal with wwasp at all. She has her reasons. Her focus is different from that of say Fornits or ISAC or many others. Her site is beautifully done and very moving and I often refer others to it.
Could you explain please? WWASPS is the largest and arguably the most dangerous. Why on earth would she leave out WWASPS?
What is her 'focus'?