PLANET VALENTI News and Commentary

(FORTRESS OF SOLITUDE, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 4, 2012) — Remember, tonight we will show The Haunting, Robert Wise‘s brilliant take on Shirley Jackson‘s genre classic, The Haunting of Hill House.

This is part of our Advanced Composition class. The class will begin in K-111 at BCC beginning at 5:30 p.m. The screening will commence shortly thereafter. The Professor promises to be brief in his housekeeping remarks to the class. You, the public, will be warmly welcome to sit in to watch the film, for free.

Filming Abroad, Wise Gets Wise with Budget

When Jackson’s book came out in 1959, Wise bought the screen rights. When he got the financial backing of MGM Borehamwood (where Stanley Kubrick filmed 2001), he visited Jackson to discuss the book and the screenplay, credited to Nelson Giddings, though Wise had a strong hand in it. Wise said the title of the book was too long and awkward for a movie title and asked Jackson if she had considered any other titles. She said, “The Haunting.” Wise adopted the truncated version immediately. It worked well in on the opening credits and fit neatly on theater marquees.

Wise filmed in England because MGM there offered him $1.1 million to make the film, a hundred grand more than MGM in the US. That cinched the deal. Like Kubrick, Wise was eager to film outside of the then-dying studio system. Kubrick, of course, never returned to the United States after filming 2001 at Borehamwood. The Borehamwood studios were also used by Patrick McGoohan, incidentally, to film his iconic 17-part TV series The Prisoner.

Top, The Ettington as Hill House, in "The Haunting." Below, the Ettington PArk Hotel, today.

Working smartly, Wise filmed on the tight budget. The film has an expensive look to it. He axed most of the book’s outdoor scenes (the characters rarely leave the house, giving the film a sense of claustrophobia), filmed in glorious black and white, lit the scenes brilliantly with a chiarascuric dapples of light and shadow, and suggested rather than filmed the haunting.

For example, the characters in the house often comment on the feeling of “being watched.” Wise adroitly suggests this not with boring computerized special effects but but placing many eyes on the sets — statues, paintings, sculptures of people, angels, and creatures who stare out. There’s also an eerie effect of a door being pushed in, achieved by constructing the door from plywood and rubber and having stagehands simply pushing in from the non-camera side. You’ll also notice the odd look of the exterior shots of Hill House, which Wise achieved inexpensively by filming during the day with an infrared filter over the camera lens.

For the house exteriors, Wise used what is now The Ettington Park Hotel, Stratford-Upon-Avon, Warwickshire, in central England. They began exterior filming on Oct. 1, 1962. The property has a long history of hauntings. Actor Russ Tamblyn (Luke Sanderson) has a great story  of a chilling experience he had behind the Ettington one night during a break in the filming. You can hear Tamblyn’s interview, along with those of Richard Johnson (Dr. Markway), Julie Harris (Eleanor Lance), and Claire Bloom (Theodora) on the “extras” that come with the DVD version of the film.

With this, we present this bit of history about the Ettington Park Hotel, written by the staff of Hand-Picked Hotels, a privately owned and managed hotel group known for its stunning English properties in country locations.

—– 00 —–

‘The Perfect Setting for Any Horror Story’

By Hand-Picked Hotels

Special to Planet Valenti 

Ettington Park is a brooding neo-Gothic mansion and has been the home of the Shirley family for over a thousand years. It is easy to understand why Robert Wise chose this house in 1963 as the setting for his classic ghost film “The Haunting”. With its stately towers and turrets it seems like the perfect setting for any horror story.

When I arrived at Ettington Park 9 years ago to take up my duties as the Night Manager, I was totally unaware of its legacy of eccentric and unsettling experiences and its dubious accolade of the Most Haunted Hotel in Britain, a title attributed to it by the Automobile Association.

The Ettington Park Hotel, used for THE HAUNTING's exterior shots, has been called the most haunted house in England.

It was not long before I personally experienced at first hand some of these strange occurrences and crossed the path of some of its legendary ghosts. I must emphasise however, that in all my experiences I have never once felt threatened in any way. On the contrary, I have always found the atmosphere at Ettington to be a warm, happy and welcoming one despite any sinister appearances.

What Do We Mean By Ghosts?

I use the term “ghost” to describe a variety of different phenomena: something that goes bump in the night; the visible apparition; objects moving unaided; voices emanating from the air; the overwhelming feeling of an unseen presence and being watched and the moving, or passing shadows of someone or something.

Do Ghosts Actually Exist?

Personally speaking and despite my own encounters at Ettington Park, I am not particularly interested in the paranormal as such. However, if you believe in life after death then I think the only answer can be yes. It is after all the basis of most religious and personal philosophies that part of us continues to survive after physical death. This part is variously referred to as the soul, spirit, personality, or life force.

Time is an enigma. St Agustine asked the question, “what is time?” In reply to his own question he said, “If no one asks me, I know what it is. But if I wish to explain it to anyone who asks me, I do not know.” His words capture the enigma that has confounded philosophers throughout the ages, mystified mathematicians and left scientists nonplussed. We cannot touch time or taste it, we cannot see it, hear or even smell it and yet we sense it all around us for as long as we exist. It is the intangible medium in which our minds are suspended.

From a more current scientific point of view, theories in quantum physics and the most recent cosmological observations reinforce the concept of the existence of parallel universes. Our universe appears to be just one bubble in a universe of other bubbles or parallel universes. Cosmologists also conclude that these other universes can have entirely different properties and laws of physics that could explain the various strange aspects of our own. It could even answer fundamental questions about the nature of time and our understanding of the physical world around us.

Is it not possible that the ghosts and ghostly phenomena are unwitting glimpses into these multiple/ time dimensions being currently defined by scientists but, as yet, not fully understood? The scientific concept of infinite earth’s in parallel universes intrigues me personally and recalls to my mind a very interesting statement made by Jesus in John’s Gospel: “Believe in God and believe also in me. There are many rooms in my Father’s house….I would not tell you this if it were not so”. Food for thought!

—– 00 —–

Or, as Dr. Markway says in the film after they have discovered the “cold spot,” the heart of Hill House, it’s “frozen food for thought.”

This interesting discussion brings us into relatively new territory on THE PLANET that we shall eventually explore in depth — spirituality, the paranormal, life after death, metaphysics, time, mathematics, God, and quantum physics. Yes, all that is One Topic.

To be continued.



Fact: In July 2005, police accuse a man pushing 60 years of age of multiple criminal counts in connection with separate incidents on two consecutive days involving boys aged 13 and 15, each involved separately with the man.

Fact: Police charge the man with two counts of soliciting the prostitution of a minor and two counts of assault.

He "Sent" You, All Right.

Fact: After the man received a summons from the police, according the spokesman for the man’s then-place of employment, the man failed to give notice to the board of directors of the company where he worked as president and CEO.

Fact: Because the man did not give his board truthful information, according to the company,  the board to make a sound judgment on whether the man was fit to be employed by and represent the company.

Fact: The man admitted guilt in connection with the two assault charges.

Fact: The man was sentenced to a year in jail, suspended; a year of probation; and court-ordered psychological counseling.

Fact: There is no record that he served his probation or fulfilled the court’s order for counseling.

Fact: One of the man’s best friends served in the man’s company as a senior officer and board member. This man was also head of the probation department in the city where the man lived and worked.

Fact: The man didn’t serve his probation. Reasonable Supposition: He did not serve his court-ordered probation because his buddy, the head of probation, fixed it for him. No harm, no foul.

Fact: The man continued as president and CEO, marketing symbol, and community pillar in his service to various organizations from the time of his arrest until the time the news of his arrest hit the news in mid-year, 2010. Reasonable Inference: Because the man withheld knowledge of his criminal past from his board, all compensation the man received from his company was obtained under fraudulent conditions.

Fact: The main definition of “molest” used as a transitive verb is “to annoy, disturb, or persecute, especially with hostile or injurious effect” (Merriam Webster online dictionary).

Fact: The man, having admitted to two counts of assaulting two boys (one apiece, on consecutive days), can by this definition and use be fairly and factually be called a child molester. To assault is to “molest.” To assault a young boy is to “molest” a young boy.

Fact: We are not playing with words. We are using words according to their denotative meaning. We respect words too much to do otherwise.

Fact: When and if others wish to interpret what we write and assign different meanings than what we intend, we have no control over that.

Tell them THE PLANET sent you.



The Israeli Peace Now movement, Shalom Achshav, was established in 1978, when 348 Israeli senior reserve army officers and combat soldiers came together to urge their government to sign a peace treaty with Egypt. They knew then what remains true today – real security for Israel can be achieved only through peace.

In the years since its establishment, Shalom Achshav has worked for the achievement of peace agreements between Israel and all her Arab neighbors, and has come to be recognized, both in Israel and abroad, as Israel’s leading grassroots, Zionist movement. Best known for mobilizing mass demonstrations, for many years Shalom Achshav has also been the only group conducting comprehensive monitoring of Israeli settlement activity in the West Bank (and the Gaza Strip, until Israel’s 2004 evacuation of Gaza settlements). Shalom Achshav is widely cited in the Israeli and international media as the foremost authority on settlements.

Americans for Peace Now (APN) was established in 1981 to mobilize support for the Israeli peace movement, Shalom Achshav (Peace Now), and has since developed into the most prominent American Jewish, Zionist organization working to achieve a comprehensive political settlement to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

With that preamble, we present this guest essay by writer James Carroll.

—– 00 —–

Establishment of a Permanent Palestinian State is in Israel’s Best Interests

By James Carroll

Special to PLANET VALENTI News and Commentary

Dear Friend of Israel,

jc_profile_pic.jpgJAMES CARROLL

Christians of the West have long been the unnamed third party to the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. Most obviously, the ancient Church assumption that Jewish exile from the Jewish homeland was a proof of claims for Jesus still casts its shadow. Similarly, European colonialism, with its Christ-sanctioned underpinning, spawned what Edward Said called “Orientalism,” a permanent factor in Palestinian dispossession from lands on which they resided for centuries. In effect, Jews and Arabs confront one another in a corner, the walls of which neither created.

Recently, Fundamentalist Christians, championed by groups like Christians United for Israel, have been supplying uncritical support for Jews, while other Christian groups have emphasized the Palestinian narrative, readily casting all blame on Israel. Yet the burden on those of us who view this conflict from outside is to consistently affirm the rights of both peoples. Peace will come only when both stories are heard, both sets of grievances addressed–a process which Palestinians and Israelis themselves must lead.

This abstract principle is now, of course, a quite specific matter of territory, and no one has stated it more clearly than President Obama did last May: “The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states.”

The president here stated a formula long familiar to peace advocates, yet even with formal American and international support, the idea of a negotiated two-state solution, involving equitable land exchanges, is today an endangered consensus–and so is the hope for an outcome which both sides can embrace.

That is why the long proven commitment of the Israeli Peace Now movement (Shalom Achshav) is more urgently important than ever. I am writing to commend to you Peace Now, with its U.S. sister organization, Americans for Peace Now. Israel and Palestine–not to mention political hope and justice–need Peace Now more than ever.

Peace Now is a patriotic Israeli organization. Its well-known advocacy merits a renewed emphasis, especially after the recent period of political stasis and disappointment, when many other advocates of peace have become disillusioned and discouraged. Peace Now most emphatically affirms the Jewish and democratic character of the State of Israel. But that means, with equal emphasis, that Peace Now opposes the Occupation of the Palestinians, and absolutely rejects the continuing spread of Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

For Peace Now, this is not a matter of mere rhetoric. The organization tracks and publicizes the ongoing Jewish settlement project in the West Bank. In 2011, Peace Now found:

  • A 20-percent rise in construction starts over the previous year. Of these, 5 percent (650 units) were in isolated settlements east of the planned route of the Separation Barrier, in areas that will certainly not be annexed to Israel once it reaches a peace agreement with the Palestinians.
  • The Israeli government recognized 11 illegal outposts as bona fide settlements.
  • The highest number in a decade of new Israeli construction and the highest number ever of planned construction in East Jerusalem.


Peace Now also found that much settlement building, about one third, takes place on private Palestinian land in the West Bank. Such settlements also spring up amid hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in East Jerusalem–often with American Jewish and Evangelical Christian financial backing. Peace Now believes that these unending encroachments amount to present injustices and future obstacles to peace. They must be noticed. They must be condemned. They must be reversed.

This is why I am writing to ask you to support Peace Now, and its sister organization in the United States. Americans for Peace Now provides nearly half of the funding for Israel’s Peace Now and helps make possible the actions, research and legal advocacy that assist peace-seeking Israelis in taking back the middle ground.

APN’s informative website ( offers a wealth of information and analysis for Americans to think more clearly–and pragmatically–about Israel’s challenges.

The “app” that APN has released, an interactive map of the disastrous Israeli settlements in the West Bank, is accessible online and downloadable to iPhone or iPad devices.

I am writing this letter as an American, and as a Christian. I am aware that you are receiving it as the holy seasons of Passover and Easter approach–times when the echoes of history are heard, and when, as I began by noting, people like me can have no illusion of detached uninvolvement. Our texts, our doctrines, our End Time dreams, our habits of racial and religious contempt, even our too-innocent wishes for an easy peace–these are threads in the Holy Land’s still untied knot. Historically part of the Israeli-Palestinian problem, we are obliged now to be part of its solution.

That is the invitation we have from Israel’s Peace Now and its U.S. sister organization. Join me in supporting both Shalom Achshav and APN. Please make a generous tax-deductible contribution to Americans for Peace Now. This is how peace happens. Please commend Peace Now to everyone you know. Thank you.

—– 00 —–

THE PLANET thanks James Carroll and APN for this thoughtful piece.










  1. Andrew
    April 4, 2012 at 9:23 am #

    You’re wrong, plain and simple.

    If you’re going to write about legal proceedings then you should stick to legal definitions. The fact is, you want to call him a child molester because you’re well aware that by using those words you can conjure up an image in your readers heads. You love that you can use semantics to your benefit and you can twist language to suite your needs.

    By using the first definition of the word and not the second, you are using the wrong term to purposefully skew your “reporting”. It’s wrong, inaccurate, and wouldn’t be allowed in any newspaper in the country. Since this is your personal soapbox I guess nobody can stop you but you are well aware that no editor would allow such linguistic acrobatics in a reputable paper.

    If you want to call him a child abuser for his assault charges, go ahead. Assault is obviously abuse. But since he wasn’t convicted of sexual assault or sexual abuse, to call him a child molester-a term universally understood to mean sexual abuse-is underhanded and not accurate reporting.

    Now I’m sure you’ll retort with some pathetic “don’t play with the adults” kind of crap you always reply to me with. Most likely you’ll let somebody else reply to me and then agree with what they said. But the truth is that you don’t have a defense beyond “It’s in the dictionary so it’s ok”. Well to that I’d say that you must not have read the dictionary too closely as the second definition clearly states that to molest is to:

    2) make annoying sexual advances to; especially : to force physical and usually sexual contact on

    This is the commonly understood application of molest when in the context of the phrase child molester. Since you aren’t new to the English language nor are you especially dense, you are well aware of the distinction between the two definitions. Therefore, it is only reasonable to conclude you are willfully and maliciously distorting language to suite your worldview and your needs.

    That, or you’re just plain dense.

    • Four in one
      April 4, 2012 at 11:43 am #

      Yo, Andrew, you’re soooooooooo wrong on this one its not funny. Going up against the master when it comes to words is like you taking on Tyrone Power with out a fencing lesson.

      • Andrew
        April 4, 2012 at 11:58 am #

        The master? Really?

        If you disagree, feel free to say your two cent’s worth rather than being cute. Cute retorts and patronizing responses routinely act as substitutes for actual substantial thoughts around here. Glad to see you’re keeping up the proud tradition.

    • Scott
      April 4, 2012 at 12:14 pm #

      “2) make annoying sexual advances to”

      Isn’t that what solicitation of prostitution is? He got off because he paid his way out you know it and so does everyone else. When a crook gets caught robbing a store sometimes they drop the gun charges and get him to plea bargain to the robbery it doesn’t mean it still wasn’t an armed robbery.

    • Shakes His Head
      April 4, 2012 at 12:29 pm #

      He was not convicted of either, he plead guilty to charges. I did not realize there was a trial, but there were criminal proceedings.

      • Scott
        April 4, 2012 at 12:36 pm #

        Correct he plead to a lesser charge of assault. It doesn’t change the nature of the documented crime. By the way it’s 3:36…

    • Joe Pinhead
      April 4, 2012 at 6:43 pm #

      Just wondering if anyone worried about the words used has looked into how the victims have fared? The actions that took place we will never know for sure but it leaves one wondering why all the defense of the perpetrator and not a word of the victims. I wonder how the victims would classify it, since they were youths how do their parents classify it. What word comes to their collective minds? Since the plea was guilty were the victims afforded any counseling? If so for what? Assault? Or were other areas explored?
      Are we supposed to think that this was a onetime occurrence? The bust might have been but the assault(s) most likely occurred to other victims prior. No I do not know for sure just a reasonable conclusion. Regardless of the word used to describe the actions of Mr. Stacuzzi he did not complete the terms of his probation, and he failed to report those actions to the Credit Union who he represented in a very public way.
      We can then discuss his political connections and we have to wonder if he had access to children via the public schools? GFCU is a partner in education, in this or any other capacity was he in or near school age children? It certainly is everyone’s right to dissect words I mean we seen it before the old what is your definition of is. I contend it is also every child’s right to grow up without being abused, molested, terrorized, assaulted etc. let alone by a pillar of society.
      Sorry but as I see it the children have been victimized twice.
      Just sayin

      • danvalenti
        April 4, 2012 at 8:08 pm #

        As always, you get to the core. What about the victims — beginning with the 13- and 15-year-old boys. It’s going on seven years after: How are THEY holding up? Were their others, or was these two incidents, on consecutive days in July 2005, in Biddeford, Maine, merely the tip of an iceberg? Would you agree this is a serious question that deserves an answer?

        • Joe Pinhead
          April 5, 2012 at 7:34 am #

          The short answer is YES YES YES, I am amazed at the entire lack of reporting on the entire situation regarding pedophiles in Berkshire County, we have all heard the rumors and rumblings from the former sheriff and on and on. What is the fallout from the Baren case? 110 days from report of the crime till case concluded? If I recall it was one of the first “daycare” cases ever to be tried. Well who lost the evidence? Where was it found? Who got reprimanded by the courts? Why doesn’t the Beacon or the Colonial theater show the documentary on the case after all they are community theaters. I could go on but will spare it for now.

    • Molly
      April 4, 2012 at 7:03 pm #

      As much as I loathe Angelo Stracuzzi for what he did, and even though the arrest documents in Maine do state what the real story is, you are correct, Andrew, and I have to agree with you.

      • Andrew
        April 4, 2012 at 7:10 pm #

        Thanks. Notice I’m not defending Angelo for one second. Abuse is abuse and as a teacher I’m disgusted and angry at the mistreatment of children in any circumstance. We can easily demonize such actions without resorting to lying or misleading language.

        • danvalenti
          April 4, 2012 at 8:09 pm #

          We can agree: “abuse is abuse,” bottom line. Victimizing children is heinous.

      • Molly
        April 4, 2012 at 7:19 pm #

        That is being said from a “journalistic” or writer’s aspect. But I also totally agree with Joepinhead!! And after what I just wrote in reply to Charlie’s post on yesterday’s blog, please don’t get me going on “plea deals to lesser charges”!

        From a journalistic point of view, my very humble opinion is that Andrew has made some good points – the mainstream media uses these very same tactics all the time to “spin” things their way and people buy it all – hook, line and sinker. But that doesn’t make it right, either.

        From every other aspect, JoePinhead is “right on” and if this occurred two night’s in a row (how arrogant is THAT to get caught at it one night and then go back out the very next night and do it again?), this has been going on for years! What about all those kid’s lives that he ruined? What about them? Why don’t the “Angelo supporters” ever think of those kids? How could Marchetti let him run his campaign? How could Ruberto? Why weren’t they afraid of people finding out about that and, therefore, people wouldn’t want anything to do with him and not elect him? Because they KNOW that people still support Angelo. I just don’t get that… Never will.

    • Fan Dan Go
      April 4, 2012 at 7:19 pm #

      Wrong on just about every count, Andrew. You are trying hard to come accross as “reasonable” and adult, but trying too hard. Ok what substance,
      first point is about use of legal language. DV who was breaking stories (big stories) in newspapers before you were born knows all about what lanauge to use and not. Anyone, though even those of us who are not journalists or newsmen -women know you don’t report using legalese, not when reporting to a mass audience. second point, its ridiculous for you to suggest to DV what usage he meant, what def. of “molest.” He, the author , has spoken to this point. He’s the only one that can say. Not you. That’s you at your weakest. third “assault is obviously abuse.” Obviously by your own words, “abuse” is molestation.
      fourth the term you refer to is not Not repeat not “universally understood in any one way that is why the dictionaries give multiple definitions and usage. Did you skip composition in college or haven’t you taken it yet? fifth your claim to not having a defense is clearly wrong, as those who have returned your serve and smoked you have proven .. sixth well we don’t even have to address your sorry last point.
      Read / what Joe Pinhead writes on here he has the most rational response the most sensible. You learn from him.

      • Andrew
        April 4, 2012 at 7:47 pm #

        I believe you think I’m younger than I really am. I’m not sure how that idea was planted in certain people’s heads but I’m not in college and haven’t been for a while.

        As for your substantive points, I stand by my claim that from a journalistic point of view Valenti is incorrectly using the word. I absolutely know I’m not wrong and your claim that “Well since there are multiple uses of the word how can it be wrong” is just silly. Go ask your friends what it means to molest children. Go ask your neighbors and ask your coworkers. I absolutely promise that they’ll tell you it means sexual molestation and not assault.

        You nailed it on the head when you said that Valenti knows what language to use and what not to say. He knows that if he was to attempt another foray into journalism that many of the articles he writes on this blog would be rejected for specifically the reason I stated above. He sacrifices objectivity and linguistic accuracy for emotional manipulation.

        As an aside, it’s a tad bit hypocritical to call me out as not having taken a composition class (I have) when your ability to form sentences and capitalize words is sadly lacking. Also, I don’t need to seem like an adult when I have been an adult for some time.

      • Michael Hitchcock
        April 4, 2012 at 9:44 pm #

        Fan Dan Go,
        I agree with Dan that the use of the word molester is totally fine here.
        I was going to leave this thread to itself, but your reply was particularly grating and I could not in good conscience leave you thinking you had written anything here of value.

        Neither an ordered list nor a point for point “refutation” make a good argument. They add nothing to a conversation and you still let the person you are disagreeing with set the entire course of the discussion. Very weak method.

        Even weaker is talking about your age, Andrew’s age, or the age and experience of Dan. One of the reasons people respect my intelligence is because in all cases, I am dealing with the idea or the substance of the world, not attacking or supporting the person.

        Nota bene, if you respect Dan so much, ask him what a paragraph is for and then do it the way he says to. I appreciate his concise and accurate view on that and I feel you could benefit from it.

    • danvalenti
      April 4, 2012 at 8:02 pm #

      Thanks for your views. I will only say (a) they are appreciated and (b) you are wrong in your statement that I “used the wrong term …” I chose the definition of the transitive verb according to the usage and meaning I intended. “Assault” of a child is “molestation” of a child. You are correct when you say that I delight in language, and that semantics, as a profound aspect of how language conveys meaning, has always been and remains a key source in that delight.
      I’m curious: How old are you. Where do you teach?
      As for me, I’m 60, have taught composition, writing, mass communications, and journalism at the college level since 1977. I have in my journalistic career published an estimated 4 million words in nearly every medium that exists and have done more than 4,000 radio and TV broadcasts. Now, can you tell us a little about yourself? Thanks.

      • Andrew
        April 4, 2012 at 8:26 pm #

        You are still wrong to write what you wrote. You know it, I know it, and the amount of time you’ve spent teaching at the community college level must have made you aware that when discussing a court case and legal charges you can’t simply make up a charge because a word has multiple meanings. Come on Dan, the fact that you’re old doesn’t mean that you’re right.

        • Four in one
          April 5, 2012 at 7:10 am #

          Why don’t you answer Dans questions here ? Your insult about him being old (experienced) does you no good. So I calling you out: CAn you answer for us the simple questions DV asked you?

          • Molly
            April 5, 2012 at 8:32 am #

            No one here knows anything about anyone else, although obviously Dan knows a few. But the rest of us don’t at all. Why should Andrew have to reveal anything about himself – just because he disagrees with DV? Oh well…

            I think people think you’re young, Andrew, simply because of one of your earlier postings where Dan asked if you were the ‘kid’ who just flunked out at BCC and you replied no, that you graduated a few years back (can’t remember now exactly when) and went on to a 4-year – therby making you somewhat young (wellll, comparitively anyway!)

  2. watchful eye
    April 4, 2012 at 11:06 am #

    What does the court docket read from Bidderford, ME that the Gazzette published about this story when it broke? I think it would be helpful for all to have it reprinted in here.

    • danvalenti
      April 4, 2012 at 8:02 pm #

      THE PLANET shall be publishing this tomorrow, if all goes to plan.

  3. Ed Shepardson
    April 4, 2012 at 12:03 pm #

    An old bartender friend once told me that way to screw up a good bar story is with the truth. People here seem to like your bar story.

    • Scott
      April 4, 2012 at 12:34 pm #

      My wife’s father told me a bar story once it had shooting, car chases and a murder over state lines that ended in Texas giving someone the death penalty turns out I came across court documents years later that affirmed his whole story.

      • Ed Shepardson
        April 4, 2012 at 3:10 pm #


        • Scott
          April 4, 2012 at 5:12 pm #

          Sometimes when you hear stuff and there’s court documents to back it up maybe it has some truth, maybe…

    • danvalenti
      April 4, 2012 at 8:03 pm #

      Yeah, Ed, too bad I screwed it up with the truth!

      • Andrew
        April 4, 2012 at 8:58 pm #

        The truth was bad enough with you having to change it. That’s what’s a mystery to me. “Assaulting a child” is horrific enough that to change it to “molesting a child” makes no sense. Why do it? Maintaining accuracy when charges like this already anger people is a no-brainer. Yet you seemingly can’t help yourself by being cute with words.

        • Pound
          April 5, 2012 at 4:54 am #

          If you looked at it from the victims point of view and maybe most other people, that are not part of the “GOB” network, ~ couldn’t you say that Angelo with his influence had the words changed to make him look less like a monster in the public’s eye?

        • Shadow
          April 5, 2012 at 6:18 am #

          Mr. Valenti, just an fyi, the poster Andrew has been tossed of numerous topix boards, due to his absurd left wing comments, and rude responses to people who dare question him. He brazenly gives a false name, and then attacks people when they point out he is not who he says he is.

          • Molly
            April 5, 2012 at 8:36 am #

            I don’t know – to me Andrew seems intelligent, well read, well spoken and knows how to write. He/she just merely seems to have some differing opinions –but isn’t that what this is all suppose to be about? Giving our various opinions, perhaps sometimes changing another’s opinion because of what we point out, etc? It would be sooooo boring to have EVERYONE spouting the exact same things! What kind of a debate is that?

          • Scott
            April 5, 2012 at 1:04 pm #

            this from a gy posting as shadow go figure.

      • Ed Shepardson
        April 5, 2012 at 7:09 am #

        My old bartender friend also told me to always stick with the bar story, accurate or not, especially when it’s your bar.

  4. GMHeller
    April 4, 2012 at 12:04 pm #

    Mr. Valenti,
    How telling that none of Greylock Federal’s directors, all those with the fiduciary obligation to protect the interests of the credit union’s membership, have sought to recover from Mr. Stracuzzi any of the compensation paid from the date he was first charged with criminal acts in Biddeford, Maine to the day Stracuzzi finally resigned in disgrace from Greylock’s board.
    What’s the stature of limitations in which board members may act?

    • dusty
      April 4, 2012 at 12:56 pm #

      All I know is that years ago before Greylock Credit Union got huge they used to pay yearly dividends to the “owners”…the people who made it what it is. Somewhere along the line as they doubled, tripled and quadrupled in size and assets they cut out the dividends to the “owners”.

      Correspondingly, Angelos compensation skyrocketed and, well, draw your own conclusions as to what the word “owners” means now.

      • danvalenti
        April 4, 2012 at 8:06 pm #

        Yes, as GFCU got big, you, its “members” got small.

    • danvalenti
      April 4, 2012 at 8:05 pm #

      As far as I can determine, Glen, the statues have not expired. You bring up a key point. Greylock is member-owned. Since AS kept the news of his arrest secret, he indeed failed miserably in his fiduciary role. Proof of that is how quickly he left Greylock after the story broke. Overnight, he became radioactive. We can assume the same would have happened if he had been outed in 2005.

  5. Rick
    April 4, 2012 at 6:33 pm #

    What is going on at the Berkshire Beagle? The advertising department being closed and shipped overseas?….Big layoff in May…check it out…..

  6. Ron Kitterman
    April 4, 2012 at 6:41 pm #

    @ Mr. Heller from my understanding the statue of limitations is 6 yrs, but could be high as 20 depending on the contract between the parties. Just my thoughts, but I wouldn’t think Greylock would want the publicity of a civil case.

    • danvalenti
      April 4, 2012 at 8:09 pm #

      Thanks, Ron.

    • GMHeller
      April 5, 2012 at 1:49 am #

      Mr. Kitterman, it’s not as if it’s a big secret now why Mr. Stracuzzi was canned/resigned, so do you think publicity over a lawsuit is the real concern?
      Sounds to me like just another case of GOB’s protecting a fellow GOB.

  7. GMHeller
    April 5, 2012 at 2:02 am #

    To Molly,
    In Re: Andrew.
    Pay no mind to ‘Andrew’, Ms. Molly.
    Andrew appears to be the same troll who posts on Topix using screen names such as ‘Solons’, ‘Praxis33’, et al..
    Solons appears to live in Northern Berkshire County somewhere around North Adams (but he claims Williamstown).
    He uses proxy servers continually in an effort to disguise his actual location.
    Solons/Praxis33 has proven himself to be a congenital liar.
    Suggest you try to get ‘Andrew’ to provide verifiable positive identification.

    • Scott
      April 5, 2012 at 4:13 am #

      why? Why do you care? You live in another state it would be stupid for someone to do that on topix don’t you think?

    • Four in one
      April 5, 2012 at 7:14 am #

      GMH and did you notice how “Andrew/Solons/Praxis/etc.etc.etc.” didn’t give DV anyu information on the simple questions he asked about A/S/P/e/e/e/’s identity ? Strange, don’t you say, and cowardly on “Andrews” part?

      • Andrew Stevens
        April 5, 2012 at 12:08 pm #

        My name is Andrew Stevens. I am not this other Andrew, and no one from Planet Valenti has asked me to answer any questions about my identity. So, it’s a little hypocritical for those of you posting under “Shadow” and “Four in one” to criticize anyone about anonymity while you yourselves remain anonymous.

      • Scott
        April 5, 2012 at 1:02 pm #

        What is your identity? Mine is behind my name just click on it.

    • Molly
      April 5, 2012 at 8:39 am #

      Really? Just doesn’t seem like the same writing style or the same “bullying” mentality to me. He has never said anything offensive on here to my knowledge anyway. But of course, perhaps!!!

  8. Ron Kitterman
    April 5, 2012 at 4:31 am #

    @ Mr. Heller facts are stubburn things, so much for member owned and value drive huh ?

  9. GMHeller
    April 5, 2012 at 3:01 pm #

    ‘Andrew Stevens’ claims:

    “My name is Andrew Stevens. I am not this other Andrew, and no one from Planet Valenti has asked me to answer any questions about my identity.”

    Yet, just a few comments above, Dan Valenti plainly asks:
    “I’m curious: How old are you. Where do you teach?
    As for me, I’m 60, have taught composition, writing, mass communications, and journalism at the college level since 1977. I have in my journalistic career published an estimated 4 million words in nearly every medium that exists and have done more than 4,000 radio and TV broadcasts.
    Now, can you tell us a little about yourself? Thanks.”

    Andrew Stevens, if indeed that is your name, please indicate the specific polling address where you are registered to vote as well as the exact full name in which you are registered to vote?

    • Andrew Stevens
      April 5, 2012 at 6:32 pm #


      Dan Valenti is asking another Andrew those questions. And, on Topix you have demanded that I give you three years of my tax returns,, my social security number, my credit card numbers, and recent receipts from grocery stores I shop at. So, forgive me if I consider you rather unhinged. You’d be better off sticking to the topic at hand, but your readesr should know that GM Heller has demanded that the editors, writers, and staff of the Berkshire Eagle disclose their sexual orientation to their readers. So, It’s unlikely that GM Heller’s position on gay marriage is all that well thought out.

      • GMHeller
        April 5, 2012 at 6:44 pm #

        ‘Andrew Stevens”

        You write,”And, on Topix you have demanded that I give you three years of my tax returns,, my social security number, my credit card numbers, and recent receipts from grocery stores I shop at.”
        Another lie and attempt to mislead and dissemble, Mr. ‘Stevens’.
        All that has been requested on Topix and on PlanetValenti is that you positively identify yourself in such a way such that the identity you claim can be verified with certainty.
        As it stands now, NOTHING you provide in the way of online identification has been verifiable including the alleged consulting company you claim is yours and where you claim to work.
        What has specifically been requested both on Topix and here on PV is that you provide your full legal name in which you are registered to vote along with the specific address of the polling place where you are registered to vote, so that it can be verified with the registrar of voters that indeed you are who you claim to be.
        In addition, your continual use of proxy servers to disguise or outright hide your location does not give anyone confidence that you are who you claim to be.

        • Andrew Stevens
          April 5, 2012 at 7:10 pm #

          You lie like you breathe, Glenn. Here is your post. NUmber 86 in the “Anyone here [sic] the Rumor going around?” thread:

          So Solons/Praxis33 are you ready to come clean?

          This is what I demand to see:

          Your last 3 years tax returns
          Your current phone and electric bills
          Your social security number
          Two major credit card numbers
          And the last 4 grocery receipts you shopped at

          Unless I see these things immediately to prove your Identity, you will be a liar and a loser. You need to get them to me by private courier. Contact me through Planet Valenti.

          Here is a link to the post itself:

          For the few people paying attention to you now know that you are certifiably insane.

          • GMHeller
            April 5, 2012 at 11:06 pm #

            Nice try ‘Andrew Stevens’, but in all likelihood that silly comment was posted by you yourself using one of your proxy servers because it certainly did not emanate from my McLean, VA ISP.
            This is exactly the kind of disingenuous dissembling crap you bring to Topix such the bulk of comments posted via proxies from outside the area are now presumed to be yours.

        • Andrew Stevens
          April 5, 2012 at 7:15 pm #

          And, here are your comments about the sexual orientation of the staff of the Berkshire Eagle:

          Isn’t it time The Berkshire Eagle came out of the closet and tell its readers the sexual orientation of each of its editors, columnists, reporters, contributing writers, and managers?

          If the ratio of homosexuals to heterosexuals in American society is between 1% (according to the U.S. Census Bureau) and 10% (according to ‘social diversity’ classes being taught on some school campuses), anyone want to make book that the ratio at The Eagle is 60% gays to straights?

          Here is a link to your post:

          • GMHeller
            April 5, 2012 at 11:15 pm #

            Andrew Stevens, once again you mislead and provide a bogus link to boot.
            If you are going to cite a comment, at least have the courtesy of providing a valid link so that readers can read for themselves the context of the comment.

    • Andrew Stevens
      April 5, 2012 at 7:47 pm #

      Given that this Topic is about gay marriage, here’s another one of GM Heller’s posts about homosexuality and the Berkshire Eagle:

      Now that ‘Don’t ask; Don’t tell’ is history, perhaps it’s time, in the name of truthfulness, fairness, and full disclosure, for The Eagle’s reporters, editors, and editorial writers, whenever writing on any aspect of homosexuality, to indicate whether or not the writer is in fact a homosexual.


      • GMHeller
        April 5, 2012 at 11:51 pm #

        ‘Andrew Stevens’, what issue do you have with the comment as posted?

        Here is that comment posted back in January, 2011
        “Now that ‘Don’t ask; Don’t tell’ is history, perhaps it’s time, in the name of truthfulness, fairness, and full disclosure, for The Eagle’s reporters, editors, and editorial writers, whenever writing on any aspect of homosexuality, to indicate whether or not the writer is in fact a homosexual.”

        ‘Andrew Stevens’, don’t you think that when an editorial writer takes a strong stand on a controversial topic wherein the writer appears to have a personal agenda, that said editorial writer has an obligation to the reading public to fully disclose exactly what his/her personal agenda or bias is?
        In the specific matter of ‘Don’t ask; Don’t tell’ — the subject of the posted comment — since The Berkshire Eagle editorial writer was coming out strongly in support of abandoning DADT, the editorial editor had an obligation to let readers know whether or not he is homosexual, especially since if he’s gay, such would bear on his point of view and the public should be aware of that.
        Andrew Stevens, you got a problem with editorial writers making full disclosure in matters where they have a built-in bias?

        • Andrew Stevens
          April 6, 2012 at 6:38 am #

          “Glenn Heller,” you were perversely demand that the Eagle disclose the sexual orientation of its entire staff. To what end? To bolster yet more of your conspiratorial nonsense that an entire newspaper is devoted to advancing a homosexual agenda? Is everyone that supports the repeal of DADT or gay marriage gay? So what if they are? How exactly is gay marriage or the repeal of DADT a threat to the social fabric of the nation? I doubt you know any gay people who are married. Why don’t you talk to someone who is. It may change your thinking.

          And, the disqus link is not bogus. It’s full your hectoring blather at the Eagle.

          • GMHeller
            April 6, 2012 at 9:55 am #

            ‘Andrew Stevens’, when The Berkshire Eagle takes strong editorial stands on controversial subjects, don’t you believe it incumbent on those responsible for writing such editorials to provide full disclosure to readers as to whether or not the writer or editorial board have personal agendas or personal attachments to the issues under discussion?
            If The Eagle were touting G.E. stock would you not want to know whether or not the writer of editorial board were heavily invested in G.E.?
            Why should sexual orientation go undisclosed in matters where The Eagle is strongly touting a homosexual agenda?

            If a high percentage of those on The Eagle’s editorial board or the editorial writer himself is gay, is not the public entitled to that information when it is reading an editorial strongly touting an aspect of the homosexual agenda?

            ‘Andrew Stevens’, this issue of honesty and full disclosure is plainly one foreign to you, seeing as how you still have yet to provide any positive identification as to your own identity, and you also have yet to deny that you post comments on Topix using proxy servers and multiple screen aliases intentionally to mask your location and to disguise your true identity.

  10. Andrew Stevens
    April 6, 2012 at 12:36 pm #

    I do not use proxy servers and post under multiple names on Topix, or on any other forum. And, I am who I say I am. I couldn’t care less whether you believe me or not.

    As for your wanting to out employees of a newspaper that publishes and editorial in favor of gay marriage, I find it repulsive that you believe one’s sexual orientation somehow affects the validity of their opinion on any given issue. Are you surprised that most gay people favor gay marriage and the repeal of DADT? Is a man somehow precluded from writing about women’s issues because of his gender, or likewise for a woman writing about men’s issues?

    Marriage is not solely for procreation. And, whether gay people marry affects my life not a whit. One wonders why you are bothered by gay people who decide to marry.

    • GMHeller
      April 6, 2012 at 5:57 pm #

      ‘Andrew Stevens’, ‘outing’ homosexual employees of an intellectually-bankrupt newspaper is not the goal, and for you even to suggest it is disingenuous.
      If the editorial writer of The Berkshire Eagle is going to be in the business of touting sexual politics to readers, then readers should at least be made aware of that writer’s sexual orientation so that readers can decide for themselves whether the writer is promoting a personal agenda and his motives in doing so.
      It’s no different than requiring The Eagle’s financial reporter to disclose whether he owns stock in Berkshire Bank or G.E. when he uses the pages of The Berkshire Eagle to tout those companies.

      Mr. ‘Stevens’, regarding your concern that your bosom buddies at The Eagle will be outed, the remedy is simple.
      If any of those Eagle writers has a conflict-of-interest, one which the writer does not wish to disclose fully to the reading public, then that writer can voluntarily refrain from writing about those subjects about which he does not wish to disclose his conflict of interest.
      If a writer owns GE stock but does not wish that information disclosed to readers, then that writer shouldn’t be writing articles touting GE.

      ‘Andrew Stevens’, Why do you have a problem with honesty and full disclosure?
      We are still waiting for you to disclose your full legal name on your voter registration along with your polling place.

      Further, Mr. ‘Stevens’, perhaps you remember the following exchange on Topix?

      Praxis33 wrote:
      “Gee, thanks, Glenn. There is no reason for me to lie about who I am, where I live, or what I do. I don’t have anything to hide. Topix is a cesspool of libel, rumor, and innuendo. Enough is enough.
      So, what about it? Are you willing to meet me so you can be shown that I am indeed Andrew Stevens of Williamstown?”

      HellerCarbonCapNTrade wrote:
      “Solons/Praxis33, you still fail to respond to simple questions:
      Confirm or deny:
      Does Andrew Stevens have a mailing address in Williamstown?
      Does Andrew Stevens pay real estate taxes or vehicle excise taxes to Williamstown?
      Is Andrew Stevens registered to vote in Williamstown.
      Does Andrew Stevens have a vehicle registered in Williamstown?
      Confirm or deny, Praxis33?”

      And also this:

      HellerCarbonCapNTradeLLC wrote:
      “Solons/Praxis33, you still fail to respond to simple questions:
      Confirm or deny:
      Does Andrew Stevens have a mailing address in Williamstown?
      Does Andrew Stevens pay real estate taxes or vehicle excise taxes to Williamstown?
      Is Andrew Stevens registered to vote in Williamstown.
      Does Andrew Stevens have a vehicle registered in Williamstown?
      Confirm or deny, Praxis33?”

      Praxis33 wrote:
      “Asked and answered, Glenn. And, as I’ve now said three times, I own property in Williamstown a Nominee Trust.”

      Mr. ‘Stevens’, since you admit in the above exchange that you are indeed ‘Praxis33’, and since it is common knowledge on local Topix threads that Praxis33 also posts as Solons and a multitude of other screen aliases, and that Praxis33 uses proxy servers to disguise his location, therefore ‘Andrew Stevens’ claim in PV above that “I do not use proxy servers and post under multiple names on Topix, or on any other forum” is plainly and absolutely false.

      • GMHeller
        April 6, 2012 at 6:15 pm #

        Please note:
        The referenced link states:
        “This is Google’s cache of It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Mar 21, 2012 21:31:15 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime.”

        For unknown reasons, the entire thread titled “Praxis33, aka Solons is a coward” was deleted by Topix sometime between March 21st, 2012 and today.
        The page that remains was found cached in Google.

        Question for ‘Andrew Stevens’: Did you request Topix to delete this thread.
        If so, why?

  11. Little Blue Alien
    April 6, 2012 at 12:43 pm #

    I like how ‘Mr Stevens’ says your request gm, of any editors’ certain preference is perverse, yet the Berkshire Beagle thoroughly enjoys pointing out “made” men and womens’ special desires when projecting this certain group of peoples successes. There has been an agenda on this issue for God knows how long. Raising children has gone way over the line gm, you know this.

      • Andrew Stevens
        April 6, 2012 at 7:53 pm #

        “Glenn Heller,” you are mixing apples and oranges. So what if an Eagle editor is gay? Does that somehow lessen the force of the argument in the editorial? Would it be more persuasive if a heterosexual penned the editorial? It is the force of the analysis, not the sexual orientation of the author, that matters.

        Have you read “Howl,” by Allen Ginsberg? Recall the opening line “i’ve seen the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness…” Does the value of the poem change because Ginsberg was gay? Or, “When Liclacs Last in the Dooryard Bloomed,” by Walt Whitman, an elegy for Abraham Lincoln. What does Whitman’s being gay have to do with that poem? Do you not listen to the Rolling Stones because Mick Jagger slept with David Bowie?

        As for your other obsession, I am Andrew Stevens. The other gentlemen, that uses the name “Andrew,” and posts on this site is not me. I have not asked Topix to delete the thread you’re concerned about. I use the registered name Praxis33, and have posted under Solons in the past. I registered my name because perverted trolls, like Flobaeker/Hummm, started hijacking Solons. I do not switch between proxy servers, and do not have the time, interest, on inclination to pretend to be all these other people, as you lazily allege.

  12. GMHeller
    April 7, 2012 at 1:48 am #

    ‘Andrew Stevens, faced with incontrovertible evidence, you only now admit to being Solons aka Praxis33, something you steadfastly denied just a few comments earlier on PV.

    Further, here is another example of how prone to lying you are and how easily falsehoods flow off your keyboard; here’s your posted comment on Topix from this past Thursday, April 5:

    NA Blogger wrote:
    “Thank you Mr. Heller and all for getting rid of Praxis. He was of very low class. He is polluting now. I have sent a note off to Mr. Valenti.”

    Praxis33 wrote:
    “Heller cannot ‘get rid’ of anyone. And, I’ve not been posting on Planet Valenti as Andrew.
    You criticize people about anonymity while remaining anonymous. The hypocrisy of Topix knows no bounds.”

    Yet, now ‘Andrew Stevens’ you admit on PV to posting on Topix as Praxis33 and as Solons.
    And it cannot help but be noted that even here you only admit to the stuff for which you have already been blatantly caught in a lie.
    Andrew Stevens or whoever you are, you fail to provide verifiable identity information.
    You still come up short every time you are asked for your full legal name, the one on file with the registrar of voters.
    You have never provided the address of the polling place where you are registered to vote.
    You have shown, though, that you are not above repeatedly and brazenly lying, and that now you expect us to overlook all this lying just because you are now owning up to certain of the lies (only the ones, of course, for which you have actually been caught).
    Bottom line: ‘Andrew Stevens’ aka Solons aka Praxis33 (aka a multitude of screen aliases via proxy servers around the US and the world), you are nothing more than a congenital liar with a far-left political agenda who appears to be a shut-in living in the North Adams area (pedophilia capital of Massachusetts) — and I won’t even go into the matter of the homosexual political agenda about which you appear to be highly exercised in your arguments above.

    • Andrew Stevens
      April 7, 2012 at 7:39 am #

      Heller, you are are lying sack of shit. I’ve never denied using Praxis33 and Solons.

      Still bitter about losing to Paul Babeu I gather.

      • GMHeller
        April 7, 2012 at 9:08 am #

        ‘Andrew Stevens’, you write:
        “Heller, you are are lying sack of shit. I’ve never denied using Praxis33 and Solons.”

        Wrong yet again, ‘Andrew Stevens’.
        In a comment you posted yesterday, time-stamped 12:36 p.m., you clearly and succinctly DENIED posting under multiple names on Topix, and you DENIED using proxy servers.
        Here is that comment of yours from earlier yesterday:
        Andrew Stevens
        April 6, 2012 at 12:36 pm #
        “I do not use proxy servers and post under multiple names on Topix, or on any other forum.”

        The above comment of yours was posted BEFORE you were presented here with incontrovertible evidence that in addition to using screen name ‘Andrew Stevens’ on Topix, you also post on Topix using screen names ‘Solons’ and ‘Praxis33’.
        Further, based on my observations, you post using a multitude of other screen names, some of the most recent including:
        ‘Reuters wire’ — using a proxy indicating New York City; and
        ‘Following the story’ — using a proxy indicating the country of Finland.

        ‘Andrew Stevens’ you are proven here to be that which you plainly are, using your own comments to indict the credibility you claim to have.
        Congenital liar is as congenital liar does.

        • Andrew Stevens
          April 7, 2012 at 9:19 am #

          Heller, you are one the most dense and dim people I’ve ever come across. I have never denied posting under the registered name Praxis33 and formerly, Solons.


          • GMHeller
            April 7, 2012 at 10:37 am #

            Note that when cornered in his blatant lies, the animal Praxis33 name-calls and becomes remarkably vicious.
            ‘Andrew Stevens’ does not like being revealed for what he is.

          • Andrew Stevens
            April 7, 2012 at 11:26 am #

            Here is who GM Heller really is. Let’s see how long it takes for Heller to beg Dan to delete the following:


  13. Andrew Stevens
    April 7, 2012 at 2:04 pm #

    Well, then, you should delete the other messages related to this feud as, per your comment above, they are irrelevant to the intent of this website.

    • levitan
      April 9, 2012 at 10:44 am #

      Andrew S.,

      My thoughts exactly vis-a-vis the moderator’s redaction. It seems impartial, and the argument is not on topic (yep – a pun.)

      Also, I wouldn’t even bother giving credence to the notion an editor needs to state their religious, political, or sexual identity when they espouse an opinion that is not tinged with subversive or invidious intent.

      Gay marriage now lives in the State, and it’s fair game for newspaper editors.

  14. GMHeller
    April 8, 2012 at 1:10 am #

    Mr. Valenti,
    Recommend you NOT delete any of ‘Andrew Stevens’ responses.
    His own words do more to indict him than anything anyone else could possibly write.
    His viciousness when cornered with his own statements says it all.

  15. GMHeller
    April 8, 2012 at 1:29 am #

    Mr. Valenti,
    How convenient that this online temper tantrum thrown by ‘Andrew Stevens’ has momentarily drawn yours and readers’ attention away from the fact that Mr. ‘Stevens’ still has not provided the address of the polling place where he is registered to vote.
    Apparently, ‘Andrew Stevens’ does not want anyone checking the veracity of the identity he claims.
    Mr. Valenti, does this indicate to you someone who is acting “in good faith”?

  16. Andrew Stevens
    April 8, 2012 at 7:47 pm #

    Dan or Webmaster:

    I suggest you ignore Glen Heller’s inane rantings. He has repeatedly criticized your site on Topix, and is so paranoid that he believes one has invented multiple identities to critcize him.

    He cannot debate the issue at hand, gay marriage, so he develops yet another obsession (akin to his obsession with Alan Chartock and Dara Zantay) to distract those whom Heller believes actually care what he has to say from his patent inability to logically argue any point.

    I am open to reasoned and respectful debate, but why you even give Glenn Helller the time of day should give anyone you reads your site a measure of pause.

    • Andrew Stevens
      April 8, 2012 at 7:59 pm #

      For example, he has accused Planet Valenti of libeling Paul Babeu:

      He even criticized Dan about a lunch he had at Blantyre, and accussed him of being a limosine liberal, yet another one of his recycled repbublican talking points. The man is about as original as Milli Vanili.

    • GMHeller
      April 8, 2012 at 10:58 pm #

      ‘Andrew Stevens’, if that is indeed your legal name and if you are acting ‘in good faith’, then surely you should have no problem with those of us on PlanetValenti who express skepticism obtaining from the registrar of voters in your municipality a simple verification that you are who you say you are.
      So please tell us: What is the street address of the polling location where you are registered to vote?
      In case you are unsure, the answer to that simple question can be found prominently displayed on your voter registration card.
      ‘Andrew Stevens’, we await your reply — and please — changing the subject, deflecting the question, and/or avoiding a concise answer to this simple question will not cause it to go away.

      • Andrew Stevens
        April 9, 2012 at 9:21 am #

        Glenn Heller posted his obsessive query at close to 3:00 am.

        I’ve answered this question a thousand times. My polling location is none of your business. My legal name is Andrew Stevens. I live and vote in Willimastown.

        It’s time for you to move on.

        If you want to have a reasoned debate about gay marriage, or any other topic, then let’s do so.

        • GMHeller
          April 9, 2012 at 11:08 am #

          Andrew Stevens, you claim to be willing to divulge what you allege is your real identity but you refuse to state the street location of the polling place where you vote so that the registrar of voters can be asked to verify that you are who you claim to be?
          Why are you afraid to allow verification of your identity?

          • Andrew Stevens
            April 9, 2012 at 2:31 pm #

            I’m not afraid, I simply don’t have to. My name is Andrew Stevens. I live in and vote in Williamstown, Massachusetts.

            Why do you refuse to explain what you do for a living? Why do you refuse to explain why you filed a Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis in the DC Circuit Court of Appeals?

            For those who are unsure what that means, it’s simply that Glenn Heller swore, under penalties of perjury, that he is indigent. So, he is either, in fact, indigent, or he lied to a federal court about his indigency.

            This refusal to explain a claim of indigency is relevant here because Heller cannot engage an issue on its merits. Look how quickly he hijacked this message board into an Ahab-esque search for where I vote. As if where I vote has anything to do with my opinion about gay marriage, or any opinion that I hold about anything.

            The man develops obsessions for inexplicable reasons, and manifestly cannot let them go.

  17. Only the Shadow Knows
    April 9, 2012 at 10:35 am #

    Point of legal order, what is your full legal name that you are currently registered to vote in Williamstown. Is that Andrew Stevens? Or is it Andrew L Stevens, or L Andrew Stevens?

    • Andrew Stevens
      April 9, 2012 at 2:23 pm #

      Hi, Eric Stratton, rush chairman, damn glad to meet you.

      When you give your legal name, you can ask that question again.

      • GMHeller
        April 10, 2012 at 1:40 am #

        So, let’s summarize.

        During a discussion of the hot-button political issue of homosexual marriage, a poster (who claims his name is ‘Andrew Stevens’ but refuses to provide information that would enable verification of this) accuses a second poster (who uses his real name) of not engaging the issue of homosexual marriage “on its merits”.

        As ‘proof’ of his argument, poster Stevens claims the second poster has committed identity theft and introduces as ‘evidence’ a brief excerpt from a motion the second poster filed in his own name in an obscure FCC-related administrative proceeding of the 1990’s having nothing to do with homosexual marriage and in which the second poster’s identity was never in question.

        Simultaneously, poster Stevens (who also goes by a multitude of ever-changing screen aliases and uses proxy-servers to mask his location) refuses multiple requests from multiple posters to provide basic information which would enable anyone to positively identify whether poster Stevens is who he claims to be (the information requested being the address of the government building where poster ‘Andrew Stevens’ votes on Election Day).

        ‘Andrew Stevens’, is this an accurate summary for what has transpired so far on this thread?

  18. Only the Shadow Knows
    April 9, 2012 at 10:47 am #

    Additional question. You say you vote in Williamstown. Do you vote by absentee ballot for someplace else or are you registered to vote in Williamstown MA currently?

  19. Little Blue Alien
    April 9, 2012 at 11:42 am #

    This past Saturday I was at an establishment that I frequent each week for a couple of hours. What I do there is really none of anyone’s business yet Mr Stevens said he was at said establishment two weeks ago and claimed that, in fact, I was not there to prove to me and all else who he says he is. After a few precise questions as to the surroundings and employees at this establisshment, Mr Stevens in fact, was caught in another lie. This is about the only area that he is consistent on in so many areas of delegation. Since then, he has only gone on to ridicule me as to what other’ legal’ ways I pusue to make money. GM does a fine job and is better in areas of delegation than I. Just because he may have made some mistakes in life does not mean his insight does not matter. I enjoy reading what he has to say whether I agree with him or not.

    • Andrew Stevens
      April 9, 2012 at 2:21 pm #

      I never said I was there. I don’t even know where “there” is as I do not bet on horses. For you to say that I admitted I was there is a bald-faced lie.

      But, being that this topic is about gay marriage, Little Blue Alien (a/k/a Dio, The Beagle Sucks, etc.) is of the mind that gay people who are parents are all perverts, as are those who support gay marriage.

      Here is a link to his post saying that very thing:

      It’s really rather sad that these attitudes persist.

  20. GMHeller
    April 10, 2012 at 1:41 am #

    So, let’s summarize.

    During a discussion of the hot-button political issue of homosexual marriage, a poster (who claims his name is ‘Andrew Stevens’ but refuses to provide information that would enable verification of this) accuses a second poster (who uses his real name) of not engaging the issue of homosexual marriage “on its merits”.

    As ‘proof’ of his argument, poster Stevens claims the second poster has committed identity theft and introduces as ‘evidence’ a brief excerpt from a motion the second poster filed in his own name in an obscure FCC-related administrative proceeding of the 1990’s having nothing to do with homosexual marriage and in which the second poster’s identity was never in question.

    Simultaneously, poster Stevens (who also goes by a multitude of ever-changing screen aliases and uses proxy-servers to mask his location) refuses multiple requests from multiple posters to provide basic information which would enable anyone to positively identify whether poster Stevens is who he claims to be (the information requested being the address of the government building where poster ‘Andrew Stevens’ votes on Election Day).

    ‘Andrew Stevens’, is this an accurate summary for what has transpired thus far on this thread?

  21. Andrew Stevens
    April 10, 2012 at 6:47 am #

    Classic Heller. Lies and obfuscation.

    He simply refuses to explain why he swore to a federal court that he is indigent. There is no getting around the fact that Heller did exactly that.

    Now he’s referring to his quixotic quest against GE and NBC as “obscure” to deflect attention from the clear fact that he is a con artist, and a poor one at that.

    And, his arguments are so poorly thought out, his rhetoric so banal and amateurish, that he resorts to pathetic insinuations about NAMBLA and pedophilia. It is telling that Heller and his ilk continually beat that drum, and it suggests that Heller has a “wide stance,” like his hero Larry Craig.

    More to the point, Heller cannot put forth a reasoned argument about why it bothers him so much that gay people want to get married. He has yet to state his reasons.

    • GMHeller
      April 10, 2012 at 8:08 am #

      Again with the dissembling and the misleading accusations,
      ‘Andrew Stevens’ writes:
      “…. he resorts to pathetic insinuations about NAMBLA and pedophilia. It is telling that Heller and his ilk continually beat that drum …”

      To the contrary, what is posted to Topix about Mr. Stevens and NAMBLA is just the opposite of what Mr. ‘Stevens’ alleges :
      Here’s my comment posted to Topix, on a thread started by one of Mr. Steven’s ‘admirers’:

      “Now let’s be fair.
      Just because Praxis33/Solons/’Andrew Stevens’ refuses to provide any information that would verify his claim that Andrew Stevens is his real name and not just another of his many aliases, and just because P/S/AS relies on proxy servers to hide his location and to further mask the fact that he is using aliases, and just because North Adams is the pedophile capital of Massachusetts, and just because P/S/AS appears to be a shut-in residing in NA, none of these things means or even implies that P/S/AS is a member of NAMBLA.
      But it all does beg the question as to just why P/S/AS insists on hiding his identity and what it is he is hiding by doing so?
      Does he have enemies in the NA community?
      Does he have a criminal record?
      Why is P/S/AS so fearful of transparency?”


  22. Andrew Stevens
    April 10, 2012 at 8:45 am #

    Heller’s latest jeremaid is all wink-wink and nod-nod.

    And, though I do not reside in North Adams, he has besmirched an entire community by calling it “the pedophilia capital of Massachusetts.”

    What is Heller’s evidence in support of this claim?

    What does it have to do with gay marriage?

  23. Little Blue Alien
    April 10, 2012 at 5:15 pm #

    Well, most experiences of those in personal matters among friends and ‘family’ from various areas around the county don’t get published for just that reason, personal and private matters. To simply ignore or take for granted other trustworthy persons own personal experiences or knowledge of certain people from certain areas in this county is naive at best. I have had the most unfortunate privilage over the years since my late teens of knowing many in south county alone that were of adulthood when I was mid teen, when they had affairs with girls between 13-16. Let alone other unfortunate knowledge I have of many people with experiences in North County of both sexual preferences. Does this still happen today. It wouldn’t surprise me one bit, especially of those that espouse to liberal principles.
    One would ask what this has to do with marriage, well it all comes down to what you would class certain preferences as desires and what is actually normal. Yes normal, another word that seems to escape certain minds. It is amazing how our society has simply and arrogantly neglected the natural order of life itself. To some extent I’ve recently been observing our Muslim brothers and sisters view, and that is they see the use of drugs, alcohol, straight extramarital affairs, gay sex, pornography, and the many other vices this country has to offer as all the same immoral. Yes, they accept homosexuals as brothers and sisters, but not the act itself. For God to accept you, you must submit and accept God and the natural order of all living things. Regardless of how imperfect nature itself can be sometimes. It really isn’t that difficult of an issue, and in fact 12 years ago it wasn’t an issue, until lawyers, liberals, and anti God and antichrist views entered the realm.
    What is it that got you here and what is it that will get you there 7 generations from now, I’ll stick with my lady, second to none. There really is no other way.

  24. Little Blue Alien
    April 10, 2012 at 5:36 pm #

    I would like to point out to Mr Knowitall from North County, to think or imply that one human being is better than another based on net worth is a form of predudice, stereotype, and a grave under estimation of anyone. After my life experiences so far and what I see and fear for the future, the brunt of blame must be shouldered by those in high places, they’ve failed all of us. Regretfully, so many are still brainwashed, blinded, and ignorant from the white man’s ways.
    Pysically and spiritually broken, some North County folk relish of such misfortunes on other good God loving and caring people.
    No surprise there.

  25. Little Blue Alien
    April 11, 2012 at 7:24 am #

    Clarity. Not in this country, all ‘grey’ areas.

  26. Little Blue Alien
    April 11, 2012 at 10:26 am #

    I would also like to point out that in general, and as a Catholic, all religions are right. In order for us to move forward as a society here on this continent, there must be some additional form of retribution for our Native Indian brothers and sisters. How exactly all this will transpire has been of an intense inner spiritual struggle for me personally, and has been difficult on many days as I have been purging my own dark forces within since 2010. Make no mistake however, there are those days of deep spiritual completion of dense thoughts exiting from my heart to my mind and off my lips. I certainly would be better served to drop the negative aspects of debate but I feel in this country and this state we are past the point of no return. See California? Our govt is not listening, I hope I am wrong.

  27. Little Blue Alien
    April 12, 2012 at 5:53 pm #

    As a concerned parent,
    This issue, should go to the voters, especially the matter of raising children, and teaching schoolchildren. This is not democracy in any stretch of the imagination and simply is brainwashing. This state has no consideration for all citizens at the administrative, court, political, and media levels.

  28. Little Blue Alien
    April 14, 2012 at 4:08 pm #

    About a year or so ago I was at a local business when two men got out of a car. At first, I did not know the person getting out of the passenger seat was a man and actually was somewhat dressed up like a women and had a bonnet on, no bs! He then went to the back seat of the car and a child got out of the car and the man said “come with mommy”. The man took his bonnet off and they proceded to go into the local business. Does anyone in their right mind think this is how our future should be raised because this is going on right under our nose and before our very eyes. What on earth has gone wrong with this country?
    I guess the end of days are really here.