What a Psychology DOCTOR says about "Kali" (Kimberly Barnard)

SEE alt.usenet.kooks for mo
Yes, the following quotes a psychology Ph.D. assessment of "Kali":
ALL THE FOLLOWING IS QUOTING FROM http://tinyurl.com/86hj2 :

Like her fellow gang members, Kali adroitly and assiduously uses Usenet's
unmoderated news groups and the search engines to malign those whose
views she does not like. A student in a doctoral program in Northern
Illinois, her unique value to the gang is her ability to impersonate a
civil servant and junior scientist. With such middling criticisms as
'sour grapes,' Kali seeks to demystify and disqualify her targets by
reducing their scholarly ambitions and lunging idealism to base motives,
cognitive aberrations, and unfortunate circumstances. And while she would
never dare use her given name, she leverages her (future) credential to
seize and sustain attention, begging the question: "Just how valuable is
a research PhD in Psychology if it can be earned on a part-time basis?
[see links to lists of her posts]". While most academics and
practitioners use online forums to support their professional
development, it would seem the cybermagnate Kali uses her professional
development to cast aspersions on the legitimacy and mental health of
others. Like fellow gang members, she refuses to disclose the specific
nature of her objections to the persons she assaults out of fear a
deafening “so what?” would drown out the crickets and sage brush. All the
ad hominem creature Kali need do is hang obscure terms like screed and
kook and sour grapes while flashing a badge reading scientist,
instructor, and beloved doctoral student, leaving future generations of
Googlers to assume her targets must have done something wrong. A game
player with a penchant for cooperative networking, the student Kali
collects memberships in professional organizations, moderates a number of
online psychology forums, and develops her department's web site.



Extending Herself Beyond Her Merits

As a graduate student, “Kali” has been sufficiently exposed to the lingo
and symbols of professionalism to persuade her readers she is qualified
to opine on all things Psychology. But guile only goes so far when
tethered by an equal-and-opposite impulse toward meddling officiousness.
Using her affiliation with a research program she has not yet completed,
the only-recently-credentialed-master-of-science “Kali” seeks to
disqualify persons with greater credentials than herself (e.g. Ehrenfels)
and commenting on the mental health and DSM diagnostic standing of those
whose opinions she does not like. Her ego inflation is evidenced by her
lack of boundaries, as this recently appointed Overseer of Kooks & Trolls
for Sci.Psychology.Psychotherapy insinuates herself in the affairs of
other news groups, where she broadens her search for allies willing to
adopt her own enemies and, in turn, turn their own enemies over to her.
Now that this report has given Kali reason to fear her conduct may be
visible to members of her own (future) profession, she spends the bulk of
her day fishing for kooks in fully stocked waters (i.e. news groups
alt.astrology, alt.religion.jehovahs-witn, and alt.alien.visitors), and
has been seen flaming in news groups devoted to, of all things, classical
music, sailing, and astronomy. Not that she has any real reason to worry.
Once hired as a tenure-track assistant professor, she will enjoy the
protection of universities. With a Supreme Justice like status, tenured
(and for the most part, tenure-track) professors thumb their noses in the
face of civic authority and public opinion with the knowledge their jobs
are safe for life. Boulder Faculty Assembly Chairwoman Barbara Bintliff
on University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill (who referred to the
Jews killed in the 9/11 attacks as "little Eichmanns"): "We recognize
that academic freedom comes with limits, but we also know that any
interference with academic freedom without strong cause sends a very
chilling message to the entire academic community."


And while proponents of Churchill's constitutional right to free speech
were not in short supply, many did call for an inquiry into the
university hiring and promotion procedures that allowed this fellow to
reach the pinnacle of the faculty (i.e. department chair). Ahh,
universities. They thumb their noses in the face of civic standards, even
going so far as to demand campus rape allegations be investigated and
tried internally -- free from local law enforcement and county courts --
and yet they whine incessantly about not receiving enough government
funding. The gross domestic product of research Psychology programs,
which contribute so little of value to public life, is outcries for
public tax dollars to fund their left-wing authoritarianism. Kali would
be the first to tell you that all the harassment, all the anti-kook
alliance-building, all the defamation leagues in Usenet, are unassailable
rights to free speech endowed by the constitution. And she avails herself
of this right in disseminating false and potentially damaging information
about my assumed and given identities (including the false connection of
a significant fireflySun.com contributor to the name Ehrenfels). This is
the same woman, however, who attempted to intimidate me and my Web host
with a lawsuit over her concern her current /prospective employers might,
with a little research, link her real name to her activities in Usenet.
Apparently the speech I expended to defend my reputation as an author
from Kali on my own web site is not free and not protected under the
First Amendment.


(Her unique claim on) the First Amendment is not the only banner carried
by Kali. The moody Indian Goddess of Death will occasionally defend her
actions by declaring the educated opinions of her targets a threat to the
public interest. Like conjoined twin and right hemisphere Iceman, she
spends her life as a crossing guard handing out tickets to all jaywalking
news group junkies who spit their unconventional wisdom upon the
sidewalk. Kali sits in judgment of all individuals participating in news
groups. At greatest risk are individuals given to introspection who dare
to think idiosyncratically (i.e. single-source reflection). Kali waffles
between two strategic ways of portraying her enemies. Occasionally, the
remarkably moody Indian Goddess of Death will depict me as a frivolous
creature unworthy of the words she spends to explain at great length how
I am not worth mentioning. This contrasts sharply with messages in which
she depicts me as a dangerous kook whose views present a threat to public
health. The message is clear. Keep your unconventional wisdom to yourself
lest you invoke the wrath of the Indian Goddess of Death.


Like the Reaper, Kali publicly disclosed personal details about her
psychological makeup when she reported having recovered from Dissociative
Identity Disorder (i.e. formerly Multiple Personality Disorder). "I am
fully integrated now," she writes. Readers can be forgiven for
speculating whether she was awarded the role Overseer of Kooks and Trolls
given her experience reigning in a pantheon of fractured and irrational
personalities within herself. No doubt many of the persons who contribute
their views to online forums (what her gang calls “insurgents”) bare a
striking resemblance to the insurgent personalities in herself. After
all, are we ever really seeing a person in their totality when we read
their contributions to the Internet? When we put ourselves out there, we
all come across a little like characters in our readers’ dreams. Since we
never really get a glimpse of more than a fraction of someone else's
personality in cyberspace (more than likely we get a glimpse of the
person’s persona or shadow complex), Kali is likely to attribute to kooks
and enemies the same insurgent dream logic, single-mindedness, and
splintered one-dimensionality she recognizes in the pre-formed and
subordinate identities that once nuisanced her world. It certainly
explains how she opposes the Logos of Ehrenfels as if he were a command
hallucination.


In a creepy reprise, if only by analogy, of her early condition, Kali
assumes multiple aliases for the purpose of posting harassing material to
the unmoderated sister of the group she moderates, at one point putting
on a one-woman play by inventing out of whole cloth both the topic and
participants of a discussion about herself. I had to laugh when
sci.psychology.psychotherapy played host to a conversation among
newcomers Monica Lake, Tamara Lane, Harry, Homer, Henry, Marty, and
James, appearing within hours of one another to collaboratively
appreciate the physical beauty and invulnerability of ... Kali (har har).
It's amazing what passes for 'fully integrated' these days. And it was an
odd choice of self-promotion. Whenever a friend (a bona fide other) asks
me what positive qualities I would like her to pass on to a third party,
words like hardworking, enthusiastic, and yes, maybe even intelligent or
resourceful come to mind, but never in a million years would it have
occurred to me to describe myself as beautiful or pretty invulnerable.


By hoarding approval from parental figures and other accrediting sources
in her department, Kali somehow managed to over-adapt to what are already
obscene requirements for professional survival in Psychology, imposing
limits on her own maturation as an adult and her individuation as a
scientist. But there's a flip side as well. This quadragenarian copes
with an acute case of empty nest syndrome by seeking love from classrooms
full of sons and daughters (ages 18-22) and from any doting figure and
strategic ally she can find in news groups. However, having said that,
Kali is anything but an invertebrate sponge who simply soaks up all the
love in the ocean. Quite the contrary. Kali also fashions herself a
government-approved lender of love to those she finds deserving.
Complementing her official news group role as Overseer of Kooks and
Trolls, Kali chartered Usenet's only "Hottie's List" and "Sweetie's
List" so that everyone knows who's been naughty and who's been nice to
Kali and to the people who love her (which includes the professional
community that furnishes her validation, identity, and sense of
belongingness). Her card-carrying membership in the Mutual Admiration
Society combines the entitlement philosophy of R * E * S * P * E * C * T
with the deafening brutishness of Cuba Gooding Jr.'s "show me the
money." And while I do not mean to imply that Kali needs affection about
as much as oxygen, I'm pretty sure that without constant reassurance, she
will die. Or at least slip into a coma.


Both Kali and the Reaper enjoy ranking roles in the administration of a
Memory Debate forum. Pasted below is an example of a header she uses when
posting to Usenet. A news group posting service she more recently used to
post to the news groups was twice suspended for catering to abusers like
herself.


SAMPLE MESSAGE HEADER


From: Kali ]
Newsgroups: sci.psychology.psychotherapy
Subject: JWE
Message-ID: ]
Organization: Institute for the Study of Wasted Time on Usenet
X-Call-to-action: Well behaved women rarely make history
X-Cuse: None
X-Honors: PF Chang's Crab Wonton Award
X-Winner: Ice Cream Cone Award
X-Valhalla: Ten gallon sombrerO
X-Message-Flag: This message violates the USA PATRIOT Act (HR 3162),
section 811(c). Intercepted by CARNIVORE/3.0
Lines: 50
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 02:07:20 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4.158.219.87
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net 1090462040 4.158.219.87 (Wed,
21 Jul 2004 19:07:20 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 19:07:20 PDT


UPDATE: Is Kali Running Interference?


Since the dissemination of this report, the doctoral candidate and
stalker who goes by the alias "Kali" in Usenet all but abandoned the news
group featured in this report (sci.psychology.psychotherapy) and
substantially reduced her number of messages. Like a crab fisherman
parked over San Francisco Bay, the 'kook-hunter' Kali steered her boat
over the fully stocked waters of alt.alien.visitors, alt.flame,
alt.astrology, and alt.religion.jehovahs-witn in search of a bountiful
harvest.


But Kali's recent re-emergence in sci.psychology.psychotherapy raises
some questions, largely because it coincided with a flood of spam that
makes her activity in Usenet, both old and new, more difficult to track
and trace. The source of the spam is a user whose nym is a string of
words that includes 'kali' (i.e. lost past echo in kali), such that a
Google Groups search on 'Kali' turns up tens of thousands of messages
that amount to nothing more than 'word salad' and that serve no
conceivable purpose other than interference. More specifically, as of
October 5, 2005, a search on "Kali" in Google Groups returns 38,100
nonsensical messages from "lost past echo in kali." The 38,100 messages
began entering the archive August 17 and continue through the present
date at a clip of hundreds per day. Kali's involvement in the creation of
this spam is at this time pure speculation, but she benefited
significantly from the spam tsunami that effectively washes away her
footprints in Usenet's toxic mud. Is Kali, or one of her associates,
using the cloak of spam bearing her name to erase her tracks?


The nonsensical word salad that appears in the body of the messages
almost always includes "ping pong." This dramatically changes what you
see when you, the reader of this report, click on the above link titled
'Kali Pings'. The 59 messages by or about Kali are now buried in hundreds
of nonsensical posts to Google Groups. Each spam message is delivered to
a Google Group with an equally random and haphazard name automatically
created on the fly. By not directing any of the spam to Usenet news
groups (i.e. by restricting the spam to Google Groups), she or he
effectively muddles a Google Groups search on her name (i.e. what you see
when you click on some of the links in this report) without alienating
any of her strategic partners (who don't take the new Google Groups
seriously but might be offended by a flood of spam to the universally
available, largest, and most decentralized user network in the world). I
have since altered the search specifications, so my links now bypass the
spam and select only the messages written by Kali as part of her Usenet
record.


NOTABLE QUOTABLES


(Let's count the multiple personalities in the messages below)


" ... Why, yes, I believe I am more intelligent than you, but then so is
just about everyone on Usenet. As to status, I'm not much into it, that's
your big thing. On Usenet, I don't think status has anything to do with
anything. Unless one is a kook, of course. You are! And I'm not!"
(Message-ID: )


" ... I will continue to work with others to see manic depressives, like
this poster are prohibited from usenet, altogether."


" ... The bottom line, Linda and socks, is that the personal and
professional lives of those who post to spp are none of your business."

" ... The time has come to write a Goofprints FAQ. Since I've never done
something like this, I'm inviting ideas, suggestions, and help from
anyone who is familiar with the Goofprints saga. Here's the first rough
version ... Lynne "Hoofprints" Lyons FAQ: v .01 ... Part I. Who is Lynne
"Hoofprints" Lyons? ... Lynne Marie Lyons ... [# DELETED] Road 37 Madera,
CA 93638 559-XXX-022X ... Email Addresses ...
... Lynne's Web Sites ... Google
for Lynne Lyons ... Guestbooks & Miscellaneous ... Part II: ... What is
Lynne so upset about? ..." (Message-ID: [MPG.1b4628dd9b47a86f98a3f5
@news.east.earthlink.net])


" ... Unlike some people around here, I have integrity. I'm not accusing
anyone of anything."


"Hi Ice [Iceman]!! send me some email?" (x-no-archive post with Message-
ID: ]


" ... Hardly the department's darling, it has been suggested to me that I
am among the best scholars in my well funded and highly rated (by
Carnegie Mellon) research-intensive doctoral program. My ideas have been
praised as highly original, imaginative, and creative, and my research -
a happy marriage of the creative and the empirical - will make a solid
contribution to the field. My trust is not placed in 'my professors' but
in the power of science to reveal the nature of unconscious processes.
While 'my professors' are wonderful resources and provide ongoing
encouragement and inspiration, they are also my friends, mentors, and
colleagues ... While the program does set forth certain requirements of
all its students, my experience is much different than yours. It's really
more like cruising through a series of green lights, with expert advice
along the way ... Here is some sincere advice for you: step back and
consider what your spiteful diatribe and knee-jerk reaction to criticism
buys you. Think about how your predatory behavior (me - here) and bitter
comments on the internet come off to true scholars. Think about how
intellectually dishonest and emotionally cowardly you appear to others
when you avoid honest discourse regarding any criticism or inquiry into
the reality of your experiences. Think about how ridiculous you appear to
people in the field who know me professionally. Really - are you *trying*
to defeat yourself?"


" ... Jack, yes, I've been reading here for years. I am a survivor, have
a dissociative disorder (PTSD, recurring major depression, anxiety), have
been in therapy making progress since '91. My focus now is on
integration. Actually, I've been active on the net as a survivor and
dissociative since '94, when I founded the first multiple's chat on
Prodigy. Later as I moved to the wide net I was an officer and web master
at Transformations.com and got their multiple's support groups started. I
had heard of asd, and started reading in '97 or so, but have never been
comfortable with sharing much personal information on Usenet, which I
liken to Grand Central Station."


"...You seem to have me confused for an adversary, Sylvia, but that is
incorrect. The word adversary infers that we are equals, and clearly, I
am your better.


"... I have always enjoyed my previous discussions with you on the
students' list, even learned a few things from you, and am now at a loss
to understand who you really are, or perhaps who you have become. I meant
what I have said, that I understand your pain, but honestly I don't
understand the choices you've made; it seems your course is one that
would keep the wound open and bleeding."


" ... It is not my way to push issues or be demanding, other than to
protect myself. I'm not a "smash it in your face" kind of gal, J."


" ... clue JWE in to the fact that his sour grapes web site is a real
turn off ... What a load of crap. Selfless? No. Utterly self centered.
Zealous rhetoric? No. Masturbatory kook screed. Grounded? Not on any
planet that has gravity. Science? JWE couldn't cut it. Advocacy for
psychology students? PULEASE... that web site does nothing but criticize
a psychology student: ME. What a retarded jackass he is. Doesn't even
understand cognitive psychology. Actually doesn't understand anything.
GET A JOB"


" ... I feel the same way - I don't judge people based on things like
this. I don't use people's personal struggles as flame bait, either, or
to try to intimidate them. This is [EXPLETIVE] Usenet, FCS."


" ... May you receive all the ridicule you so richly deserve, you creepy
little failure."


" ... I find it interesting that a psychologist [Ehrenfels] who points at
others and whines about their ethics would recruit Ss on Usenet the way
he did, without university affiliation and internal review board
approval, etc "


" ... Oh oh, a link to his self proclaimed credentials. Licensing issues?
Practising without a license? If someone took him up on that, etc. seems
that all his work would have to stay underground, or the possibility of
being busted. Too late.....lol, we know who he is, better yet, everybody
who cares knows that he has been outed. Hell, that's not even his name!
There was no PhD awarded to a JWE! Conducting research under a false
name? Good Lord, the implications here just aren't good. Not to mention
the obvious sampling issues ..."


" ... If you have nothing to hide, why do you use a made up name with a
Ph.D. after it? No Ph.D was awarded to JW Ehrenfels. If you have nothing
bold to claim, why are you making a career of misrepresentation of
yourself and academic psychology? I am posting this to tell you that I
consider you a very dishonest person with a dubious and ill fated agenda.
Your web site is rife with mischaracterizations, half-truths, and in some
places, downright deception. While you have posted quite a bit about your
doctoral research and the difficulties you encountered in graduate
school, never once have I seen you explain how much of these difficulties
could be explained by a profound mismatch between the program you chose
and your interests. In case you are not aware, some of the health
psychology programs are very nicely funded these days. Why didn't you go
on to do a post doc in this area, for instance? Why have you made a
career of "warning" students and criticizing academic psychology in such
a dishonest manner? Given the evidence, the only reasonable explanation
is that you have an ax to grind. I imagine this was abundantly clear to
would-be publishers, which is a much more likely explanation of why you
were forced to self publish than your insinuation of conspiratorial
hushing by academic psychology. You have the balls to discuss the
emotional difficulties of psychologists on your site, yet here you are, a
tribute to career suicide at the hands of your unrelenting limbic system.
There are many questions and concerns I have, mainly for the unfortunate
influence you could have on naive undergraduate students. (The grad
students know better if they are given the information you've hidden that
is central to understanding the issues you present.) You have made some
valid points about programs in the past; I'm familiar with the "weeding
out" and stress of graduate school, the political and financial battles,
and the "publish or perish" atmosphere in academic research. I gave you
the benefit of the doubt and for a long time held off on labeling you a
crank or kook or fool. But after encountering the dishonesty that
proliferates every paragraph on your web site, and noting your Darwin-
style career suicide, I see that you are just a crank. I don't expect you
to respond; I just wanted to make my opinion known." (June 29, 2004
Message-ID: )


" ... Lynne, Another semester has begun for me, and this one is going to
be a particularly consuming one because I've taken on a few projects in
addition to my usual research and teaching load. In response to all your
thrashing about in recent threads, I think you should know that my
colleagues, professors, supervisors, students, and acquaintances seem to
have a good opinion of me and my chances of success in my chosen field.
They know me well, since we work closely together. A little more to the
point: the set of people in my life who are qualified to assess my
adherence to professional ethics does not include you, or anyone on
Usenet, at all. You have no basis on which to make such a judgment. Your
assessment of my "tendencies" comes not from a crystal ball, but a
mirror. What you are seeing in the reflection is yourself, and your
threats to have other posters locked up against their will, in abuse of
your psych tech license. I don't do things like that, and never would
think of it. It's about you, Lynne, not about me. You know, Usenet is
just one of my off-time activities. Other off-time activities include get
togethers with friends, the occasional walk around the lake, dinner/movie
out, a festival, reading, writing, reading, and writing. The APA, of
which I am *not* a member, places zero interest in any of the off-time
activities of its members. Just as I might (it's been a while, but I
still reserve the right to do so) drink margaritas, cuss, kiss all the
cowboys, and dance on the bar, I might play on Usenet - the wild west,
for all intents and purposes - and participate in the long held tradition
of recognizing kooks in their obnoxious Glory Days. The APA, even if I
were a member, doesn't care about that. Furthermore, they receive several
maliciously motivated and specious complaints every year from people with
your same proclivities, and trust me, they are wise to it. They are
psychologists, after all! I know this letter, if you read it, may come as
a disappointment to you, because not only will I not be here as much for
you to attack and threaten, but I will be ignoring you most of the time I
am here. You see in me the worst that you, yourself, are capable of. If
you have any 'horse sense' at all, you must know that your threats
against my career mean nothing more than farts in the windstorm of your
self undoing. I suppose you may continue to obsess over me and threaten
me forever, but to me, it's merely background noise. One might suggest
you find yourself another hobby, or at least another target. Or maybe you
are getting a kick out of being ridiculed for all the threats you make.
Some attention, even negative attention, is better than none to you,
apparently. On this note, I'm sorry you won't be getting as much
attention from me. File your malicious, specious complaint if you want
to, but know this: I will not cow to your repeated threats, now or ever.
You would be well served to devote half as much thought to controlling
your own behavior as you do to controlling mine."


"...The kook screed is a beaut. Now the idiot is accusing me of stalking
him, is talking about himself in the third person as one of his
"contributors", suggesting that anyone gives a **** whether "my" BJ FAQ
is #1 on Google (wth?), mumbles something incomprehensible about Curio
and 'my lackeys', and threatens to (again?) write to my advisors at NIU.
All this on his amazon book page where it seems he would actually want to
*sell* that fictional POS better titled, "The Sour Grapes of Wrath". All
because I asked him to take down the fake review in my name and amazon
spanked him. What an puss! If an in-absentia kook who is very much
involved in the day to day goings on in spp, uses Linda as a messenger,
and posts his screed to his web site instead of into the group can
qualify, I think he is worthy KoTM for this ... Spin, spin, spin the
story ... fiction is so much more palatable than facts for cowards like
you, eh, Wyatt?"


In the beginning, Kali defended Ehrenfels against other members of the
ring: " ... His name is J. Wyatt Ehrenfels, and he does have a Ph.D. in
Social Psych. He is active on one APA student's list that I am subscribed
to. He does *not* display any kooky behavior on the list, and contrary to
what his web site might lead one to believe, he is not "recruiting"
students to his cause. He has some interesting and "different" views on
the paradigms affecting current academic research, and he is very
encouraging with most of the students who are looking for advice and
ideas. It makes me cringe to think what an association to bradless on
Usenet could do for him."


Ehrenfels here. Many of these messages feign control over me by
pretending to know my identity, which is harmless enough, but when she
attributes my work to one of my supporters / contributors, and when she
drags the name of this supporter / contributor through the mud, it makes
what she has to say next appear like a hypocrisy or else like a demand
for my unilateral disarmament. And let's not forget my right to defend
myself (and contributors to my web site) on my web site for the benefit
of those who visit my web site:


" ... It has come to my attention that you have published defamatory
comments about me on your web site address:


http://www.fireflysun.com/book*/SPPstalking.php


You will be held personally accountable for any injury to my person,
property, or career, whether financial or otherwise, which may result
from your disingenuous misrepresentation of me and/or my university, who
is also my current employer.


I hereby demand that you cease and desist from publishing defamatory and
libelous commentary about me, and that you retract statements,
allegations, communications, and any correspondence made or caused to be
made or issued by you that alleges or merely suggests unethical or
criminal activity on my part. You have thirty (30) days with which to
comply with this request prior to the initiation of any legal proceedings
that I (or my university) may have or will have against you. Your prompt
attention is greatly appreciated ... By providing information about my
employer and university, and linking me to spp, I am readily
identifiable. In my country, what you have on your web site is called
defamation of character ... You have falsely and publicly accused me of
stalking, which is a federal crime. You have also made allusions to my
having committed civil offenses. These are lies and therefore libelous;
Please remove such accusations from your web site."


Ehrenfels here. She can dish it out, but she sure can't take it, not even
when I avoid using her given name, as she (believes she) has been doing
with me for months now. A third way in which the above message is absurd
is that the woman actually thinks she is likely to be identified on the
basis of her affiliation AND her association with THIS "news group." How
much more celebrity does she think she has garnered as moderator of this
public bath house?


" ... The bottom line, Linda and socks, is that the personal and
ofessional lives of those who post to spp are none of your business ..."

" ... The time has come to write a Goofprints FAQ. Since I've never done
something like this, I'm inviting ideas, suggestions, and help from
anyone who is familiar with the Goofprints saga. Here's the first rough
version ... Lynne "Hoofprints" Lyons FAQ: v .01 ... Part I. Who is Lynne
"Hoofprints" Lyons? ... Lynne Marie Lyons ... [# DELETED] Road 37 Madera,
CA 93638 559-XXX-022X ... Email Addresses ...
... Lynne's Web Sites ... Google
for Lynne Lyons ... Guestbooks & Miscellaneous ... Part II: ... What is
Lynne so upset about? ..."