tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post611972736380128866..comments2024-03-27T21:24:06.590-04:00Comments on The Manson Family Blog: Did Charlie really believe in his Helter Skelter Theory?Matthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06766282574442161929noreply@blogger.comBlogger53125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-69581111789701903792022-08-14T14:29:07.758-04:002022-08-14T14:29:07.758-04:00http://disinfo.com/2013/05/the-enlightenment-of-ch...<br />http://disinfo.com/2013/05/the-enlightenment-of-charles-manson/<br />Brooks remembers Charlie referencing Armageddon by name as early as their time at Dennis Wilson's house:<br /> "... And that the battle of Armageddon, or whatever it’s supposed to be, is at hand."<br />starviegohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11256800799989566468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-92088660505519243982022-08-12T13:16:35.130-04:002022-08-12T13:16:35.130-04:00Leslie Van Houten Parole Hearing 9/6/2017
Inmate ...<br />Leslie Van Houten Parole Hearing 9/6/2017<br /><br />Inmate Van Houten: "But prior to the murders, he began to say that it looked like the blacks weren't going to start the revolution, that we would have to. And that's when he seriously started talking about us killing people."starviegohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11256800799989566468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-89228840715160520412021-03-11T11:54:00.011-05:002021-03-11T11:54:00.011-05:00First off Manson never ordered the murders , they ...First off Manson never ordered the murders , they were orchestrated by Tex Watson , Linda Kasabian , Susan Atkins and Pat Krenwinkle . Their reason which has been proved by Polanski’s director and many connected in Hollywood was that jay Sebring and woichech frkowski dealt drugs from the home of Sharon Tate. So Tex and the girls went to rob Sebring and Frkowski of the drugs and Sebring fought back and all he’ll broke loose . In fact Tex and Linda had been doing drug robberies before meeting Manson . Manson was a criminal but not some satanic hippie cult leader like many have assumed . Most nights of the week drug dealers are killed , had it not taken part in Polanski’s residence and Tate hadnt been killed there would of been very little knowledge about it . Jerome Alexandrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15711700842560876498noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-53527240521108897272021-02-17T21:52:20.318-05:002021-02-17T21:52:20.318-05:00I'll read but I don't know much about coun...I'll read but I don't know much about counterculture in the 60sAwaitingmyescapewithlovehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00101957786511230327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-52230369865577188782020-10-15T05:53:18.508-04:002020-10-15T05:53:18.508-04:00Tragical History Tour said...
Manson didn'...Tragical History Tour said...<br /><br /> <b>Manson didn't need to believe that HS was literally going to occur, although he was certainly insane enough to believe some of his own rhetoric. He just had to appear to, to brainwash enough of the family to tag along with his craziness</b><br /><br />On the other hand, I'd argue that there is no more powerful a way to get people to align with and follow a vision <i>than to actually believe it yourself</i>. That's a pretty persuasive package.<br />Charlie liked psychedelic mind exploration. LSD profoundly affected him. One should bear in mind the two colliding aspects of his person; the psychedelicatessen, the mind trouper that was struck by deep and lofty thoughts and conflating himself with being Jesus <i>and</i> the Devil. So the criminal con man fused with the carer who foresaw the decline of Haight Ashbury, the white race, America, the mistreatment of Black people and the Native American and the need for the karma to turn and justice to be applied. Yet the racist that believed the Black man was merely a subservient clone of the White master. <br />Also it's worth bearing in mind that he wasn't the only one. As you point out, he took thoughts from a variety of sources. And in that acid mind of his those thoughts brewed together that variety of flavours into something that ultimately lost people their lives, both those that died and those that committed the murders.grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-47929954070948945212020-10-15T05:39:13.138-04:002020-10-15T05:39:13.138-04:00D said:
Poston also told police he "heard&qu...D said:<br /><br /><b>Poston also told police he "heard" that Charlie shot a "black leader" in LA. But we know and so did Tex, Susan, Pat, Bobby and a bunch more that it was Crowe over a dope deal</b><br /><br />It's very instructive where one is coming from when a phrase like "over a dope deal" is used in relation to Lotsapoppa. The fact is that Watson was not in the slightest bit interested in any drugs when it came to Lotsapoppa. It was not a dope deal as such, but a scam in which he pretended to be part of a dope deal <i>for the money that he intended to steal</i>. The idea was get the guy's money and run. It was no more a dope deal than it was the Royal Ballet. So Charlie did not "shoot Crowe over a dope deal."<br /><br /><b>Charlie didn't like brainless followers and people who couldn't do things on their own</b><br /><br />He must've been loving Tex then, for Crowe, must've been loving Susan for the Grand jury, must've been loving Pat for Claude Brown and extradition, to the extent he got her to come back to LA for the joint trial that sunk her, must've been loving Linda for telling Joe Sage and must've loved Leslie for Marvin Part so much that he had to tell her to get rid of him and not submit to any psych examination.<br /><br /><b>Watson has stuck to Helter skelter the most</b><br /><br />Leslie Van Houten ? She's talked of little else since the early 70s.<br /><br /><b>whereas Susan wrote an entire book calling it a myth</b><br /><br />And have you read it ? It is a cornucopia of contradiction. By all means, discount HS as one of the motives for murder, but if you're going to use Atkins' "The Myth of HS" as your back up, you may as well also use "Dora the explorer."<br /><br /> <b>Pat has avoided saying that was the motive...She said for years she thought it was another robbery</b><br /><br />That first night, she may well have. And then she wrote HS the second night when everyone in that car was well aware of why they were out looking for people to kill ~ and who was leading the show.grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-57251774569920556472020-10-15T05:38:39.323-04:002020-10-15T05:38:39.323-04:00D. said...
He didnt believe in it, nor did a ...D. said...<br /><br /> <b>He didnt believe in it, nor did a single person who took part in the crimes</b><br /><br />Well, Pat obviously did. She could have written any two words in the English language as a sign. She chose "Healter Skelter." You know, the fact that she misspelt it tells you one thing in particular ~ it was a phrase she was accustomed to <i>hearing</i> rather than something she'd become familiar with <i>seeing.</i> And the other phrases she wrote {"Rise", "Death to pigs"} just so happened to be major tenets of HS.<br />Susan obviously did. In the privacy of her jail cell in an environment where snitching was not expected, she told her cell mate, when asked how she felt about the murders, that "now HS could begin." She even defined aspects of what HS was.<br />Leslie obviously did. In a private communique to Marvin Part that no other human being was ever meant to hear, ever, she implicated Charlie, Mary, Bobby, Tex, Pat, Susan and <i>herself</i> in murder and unprompted, gave HS as the rationale for it all and pitched Charlie as the ordained Jesus whose vision it was that they all followed and why she went along ready to kill. Remember, they did not regard what they did as murder.<br />Charlie outlined much of the thinking of HS in an interview with Rolling Stone while he was awaiting trial. At the time, although he was denying being involved in murder, he had no reason to deny HS as at the time of the interviews {about 4-5 months before the trial actually began} it hadn't become the centrepiece of the prosecution case. So he answered questions about its tenets relatively freely. He believed what was in Revelation. He believed the Beatles were prophesying. He believed in the Black uprising. He believed HS. Even when he spoke in his trial, he tried to explain aspects of it like the underground river etc. He tried to make it seem almost ordinary because to him, <i>it was ordinary</i>, it was part of his thought process at the time. Of course, he didn't tie it to murder because for all his rhetoric about the beauty of death and having died before, he didn't want to die in the gas chamber !<br /><br />grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-1081449372516848142020-10-14T17:08:01.563-04:002020-10-14T17:08:01.563-04:00Manson didn't need to believe that HS was lite...Manson didn't need to believe that HS was literally going to occur, although he was certainly insane enough to believe some of his own rhetoric. (Does anyone not insane think you're really going to live under the desert only to emerge and rule the world?) He just had to appear to, to brainwash enough of the family to tag along with his craziness. And enough of them certainly did believe it, that's been proven over and over again before the Bug ever set foot near the case. Manson's WHOLE ethos in life was to trick others into doing what he wanted. He was lazy like that.<br /><br />It's a pretty simple concept that the anti-Bug, anti-HS crowd can't seem to fathom. HS (or some element of a shit coming down apocalypse) only needed to be believed in by a few core members to be the motive to murder. They handed Bugliosi the ball of insanity and he ran with it right into the endzone of their convictions and subsequent lives of rotting away in prison. Blame them if you don't like it. Of course there were some drug deals going on and they were always looking to steal, because they were a small band of drug-using criminals.<br /><br />Manson was an angry little fuck from day dot. He lied and stole every thought in his woolly head his whole life. He wanted to get back at the world that had treated his poor innocent self so badly. Others had some motivations of their own, but Manson tied them all up in an apocalyptic scene that enough of them believed to go 'up on that hill' and start mayhem. Manson's ego made him think he could get away with it. He chose locations he knew because thieves always case joints first. And his followers stole lives. End of.Tragical History Tourhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16419266493227241434noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-80273011544858575012020-10-12T13:16:29.971-04:002020-10-12T13:16:29.971-04:00He didnt believe in it, nor did a single person wh...He didnt believe in it, nor did a single person who took part in the crimes. Poston also told police he "heard" that Charlie shot a "black leader" in LA. But we know and so did Tex, Susan, Pat, Bobby and a bunch more that it was Crowe over a dope deal. Let that be a microcosm of the entire case. Lake was a kid, kept totally in the dark about the banal criminal activity on the Ranch. Poston was to. Poston was a person actually looking to follow and br lead. Charlie's reaction to that was to basically dump him off at Barker. Charlie didn't like brainless followers and people who couldn't do things on their own. Watson has stuck to Helter skelter the most, whereas Susan wrote an entire book calling it a myth and Pay has avoided saying that was the motive, even smiling sarcastically at hearings when mentioned. She said for years she thought it was another robbery. Why would Watson stick to it most? A mundane dope dealer (which even Lake maintains he was). Because He had the real motive, that's why and claiming brainwashing and a crazy motive is a better excuse than a cold, calculated one over money, drugs and a hurt ego. Jacobson knows what the true is. But his duty was to shill for the prosecution as damage control for the Beach Boys and their management. D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00987799567880583276noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-64660111290422006212020-10-12T06:08:03.781-04:002020-10-12T06:08:03.781-04:00It was there, it was in the background, it was in ...It was there, it was in the background, it was in the air. it was hanging around but it wasn't the primary motive.<br /><br />Manson was desperate to go to the desert, but he didn't want to go alone, how could he persuade the others to go with him.SAMTHECAThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09733536535075031575noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-18483668231469414552020-10-12T03:18:50.268-04:002020-10-12T03:18:50.268-04:00If anyone hid anything, it was the bigwigs at Esal...If anyone hid anything, it was the bigwigs at Esalen who wouldn't confirm Charlie'd ever been there.grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-12448095532067195202020-10-11T14:39:16.169-04:002020-10-11T14:39:16.169-04:00grimtraveller said...
"What evidence was...grimtraveller said...<br /> "What evidence was hidden?"<br /><br />Whatever it was that the detectives found out about the Esalen trip. For sure the cops would have gone up there to ask questions.<br />starviegohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11256800799989566468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-63457600416515953812020-10-11T14:20:41.364-04:002020-10-11T14:20:41.364-04:00starviego said...
Of note is that before he left ... starviego said...<br /><br /><b>Of note is that before he left Spahn to go north, Charlie told the Family he was going to look for new young loves. He didn't mention anything about a musical performance</b><br /><br />Hey, allow a guy a bit of freedom to decide as he goes along <i>51 years ago</i> !grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-79984356203007672252020-10-11T14:18:54.004-04:002020-10-11T14:18:54.004-04:00What evidence was hidden ?What evidence was hidden ?grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-85437330732432286942020-10-11T12:24:47.608-04:002020-10-11T12:24:47.608-04:00grimtraveller said...
"... Linda ... testif...grimtraveller said...<br /> "... Linda ... testified that he said the people there were not together and were just off on their own little trips." <br /><br />Was that at the TLB trial? If she said that, she is using the same words Watkins used, which might indicate Charlie was just propagating a rehearsed spiel to his minions. <br /><br />Of note is that before he left Spahn to go north, Charlie told the Family he was going to look for new young loves. He didn't mention anything about a musical performance.<br /><br />Of course the biggest red flag of all is the hiding of evidence regarding what the investigators found out up there.starviegohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11256800799989566468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-85791313164240535872020-10-11T09:51:05.988-04:002020-10-11T09:51:05.988-04:00Only Paul Watkins seems to have mentioned Esalen s...Only Paul Watkins seems to have mentioned Esalen specifically by name. Stephanie referred to it as a sensitivity camp {Manson is supposed to have said it was a place where the rich went to play at being enlightened} but by 2011 was calling it Esalen and Bugliosi concluded back in 1970 that it must have been Esalen. When Linda speaks of that time and place, she refers to it with the catch all term, "Big Sur," so that could be referring to his general trip or the specific place[s] that he went to play his music. She testified that he said the people there were not together and were just off on their own little trips. As is so often the case, it's by putting together certain fragments that various people bring to the table, that a picture can be built up, not always by exactitude.<br />grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-11874903606304008162020-10-10T22:21:03.274-04:002020-10-10T22:21:03.274-04:00What did Kasabian say about Esalen?What did Kasabian say about Esalen?starviegohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11256800799989566468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-70945642292944354292020-10-10T21:50:55.191-04:002020-10-10T21:50:55.191-04:00starviego said...
In her interview with TLB r... starviego said...<br /><br /> <b>In her interview with TLB radio, Schram said Charlie slapped her before they went to Esalen, not after</b><br /><br />Well, this is the dialogue of that interview:<br /><br />Stephanie: We spent one night there and then we went by the Esalen Institute where I think Charlie had hopes to get some recording people on his side to record some music. <br />Cats: Did you go in with him?<br />Stephanie: No, I didn’t.<br />Cats: <i>When he came out was there a change in his attitude at all?</i><br />Stephanie: No. I had already at one point the night before seen a violent side of him and why I remained with him, I don’t really know.<br />Brian: <i>Can you tell us about that?</i><br />Stephanie: Well we met a couple of people hiking down one of the trails there in Big Sur and I think he was hoping that they would be able to provide us with dinner. I was pretty freaked out at the time and I think when they saw me they were afraid and they left. He came into the van and gave me a pretty good slap and said that I had ruined his chances for dinner that night.<br />Cats: <i>When he came out of Esalen was he even more angry?</i><br />Stephanie: Well, yeah he was. He seemed to kind of stick to himself though then. I mean he was obviously angry, was not real communicative with me so I was just along. I was just kind of along at that point.<br /><br />As interesting as all of that is, you know what I find absolutely fascinating about the entire interview ? The absence of two words from all discussion ¬> "helter" and "skelter." Not there, not once. No asking if the supposed conversation with Stephanie's sister in San Diego about the the Beatles, Blacks, HS and people lying dead on their lawns was true as far as she knew. Even if one thinks its whole existence is a red herring or a load of shit, if one is interested in getting to the truth of a matter, surely that's a question that one would put to Stephanie of all people. Like with Steve Zabriske telling the Portland police that a "Charlie" and a "Clem" had committed the TLB murders before Susan Atkins had started talking to Howard or Graham or Al Springer told the police about Charlie, it makes one wonder where exactly Bugliosi got this information from and was confident enough to put it in his & Gentry's book.<br /><br /><b>So it appears Bugs was willing to fudge the facts to make it appear...</b><br /><br />Other than that little discrepancy, pretty much everything he stated regarding the episode has been corroborated, some of it by Charles Manson !grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-54357563797090793702020-10-10T21:27:50.139-04:002020-10-10T21:27:50.139-04:00starviego said:
In her interview with TLB radio, ... starviego said:<br /><br /><b>In her interview with TLB radio, Schram said Charlie slapped her before they went to Esalen, not after. So it appears Bugs was willing to fudge the facts to make it appear Charlie was snubbed by the audience</b><br /><br />In the same interview she also said the Pauls Crockett and Watkins came after her & Kitty when they fled Barker and that she thought they were after them to kill them.<br />Stephanie was not infallible.<br />Willing to fudge the facts ? So many facts came to the prosecution that it would be unrealistic to expect <i>every single fact</i> to line up to our perfection. Funnily enough, Bugliosi said something similar to Tom O'Neill. <br />The issue isn't always whether the chronology of the facts is bang on but whether or not if there are discrepancies, they significantly alter the case the prosecution is presenting in such a way as to be detrimental to any defendants. Is that the case here ? In the 1992 edition of "HS" Bugliosi freely admits that someone from Cielo called Esalen on 30th July but doesn't know who and that this, and Manson's supposed visit there <i>remain a mystery</i>. He had independent stories from Watkins & Kasabian about Esalen as well as Stephanie's recollections {it's Watkins that specifically names the place} and whether it was Esalen or just Big Sur, according to those 3 whoever it was that Manson played his music to, the reaction was not basking in Charlie glory. Stephanie said that he was angry <i>before</i> he went in and the issue is that a]he had hit her and b]his music was rejected, not that he hit her <i>because</i> his music was rejected. In fact, Bugliosi is clear in saying that it was later in the day that he hit her. That could be at any time later in the day. Far from fudging the facts, it actually amplifies the general angry demeanour of Charlie in that two or so day period. That 42 years later in an interview Stephanie recalls that she was hit before he went into Esalen is what it is. Taking all things into consideration {Manson said that during their first time together, she took acid for the first time and it blew her mind} I'd say it's a stretch to conclude that there was a deliberate fudging of the facts when in actuality, the facts weren't really in dispute, even if the order of some of them may be.<br /> <br />grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-87307688844889619852020-10-10T20:30:51.628-04:002020-10-10T20:30:51.628-04:00"Certainly" is always a dangerous word t..."Certainly" is always a dangerous word to use when all you have are suppositions and suspicions. What one can say is that at present, Starviego certainly thinks there is some conspiracy still afoot !grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-48755873132673164102020-10-09T19:31:05.034-04:002020-10-09T19:31:05.034-04:00In her interview with TLB radio, Schram said Charl...In her interview with TLB radio, Schram said Charlie slapped her before they went to Esalen, not after. So it appears Bugs was willing to fudge the facts to <b>make it appear</b> Charlie was snubbed by the audience.<br /><br />Certainly the cops never released their interviews of the people at Esalen that night. Certainly something big was being hid.starviegohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11256800799989566468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-72180735083923340302020-10-09T11:29:09.043-04:002020-10-09T11:29:09.043-04:00Steph schram is our esalen witness but she didn...Steph schram is our esalen witness but she didn't go in with him so she doesn't really know what happenedDan Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17058602981660065969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-20363732364446447382020-10-09T07:38:15.482-04:002020-10-09T07:38:15.482-04:00ColScott said...
No one stops to think that multi...ColScott said...<br /><br /><b>No one stops to think that multiple things can be true at once</b><br /><br />Here's an irony for you Col ~ Vincent Bugliosi did. Aaron Stovitz had to and said so to Rolling Stone before the trial. And most importantly, the jury, though they didn't want it to be, could see it once all the evidence was in and Charlie's remaining supporters had testified.<br /><br /> starviego said...<br /><br /> <b>If the 'Charlie rejected at Esalen' theory is bogus, you knock away one of Bugs' reasons for Charlie ordering up HS when he got back. And thus it would leave motive more mysterious than ever</b><br /><br />Not really. With or without Esalen, the main ingredients are in place. At best Esalen serves as a more immediate timing boost in a milieu where murder was already in the air and happening {Lotsapoppa notwithstanding}.grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-89791463278231871572020-10-09T00:33:26.657-04:002020-10-09T00:33:26.657-04:00If the 'Charlie rejected at Esalen' theory...If the 'Charlie rejected at Esalen' theory is bogus, you knock away one of Bugs' reasons for Charlie ordering up HS when he got back. And thus it would leave motive more mysterious than ever.starviegohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11256800799989566468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8171370990642927748.post-26294233083717979422020-10-08T06:33:06.786-04:002020-10-08T06:33:06.786-04:00starviego said:
Was the music just a cover story?... starviego said:<br /><br /><b>Was the music just a cover story? Was Charlie just at Esalen to pick up drugs?</b><br /><br />A cover story for whom ? The Family ? They're the only people he told. And even if he was there to pick up drugs, what's the big deal or mystery surrounding that ? Take us in the direction you're going, Star.grimtravellerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00025774296829848608noreply@blogger.com