Arcadia Discussion Zone

While you keep Koi pond "Attacks" up there to prove the point that your hypercritical malfeasance knows no bounds - I'll do what I like, thank-you.

rain....are you still carrying on about koi ponds being some kind of derogatory reference posted about YOU?

For heaven's sake....I really do have a Koi pond...the racoons really did get into it and killed the fish..
I really did joke about writing a book about this one day..

How does this have anything to do with you?
Geesh You and TCP should live together..

By the way, did you get it all? The posts I mean....we have to save them for future google searches!

Google saves them - I just saved your dummy spit because it was funny - TCP was helping you with your history and I thought it was nice you getting along and all of a sudden you went into histrionics. Not my fault - I'll just remember that you're subject to breaking under pressure.

This is for my friend - this is what she told me I should do next time, thanks for the laugh, dude.

ROFLMAO

Rain said "I'll just remember that you're subject to breaking under pressure."

Wrong young lady......I don't crack...I get super angry when I am repeatedly being set up and insulted...
Like you are doing here and now.

Let me tell you something....After a grueling week of illness here, my son was rushed to the ER last night and admitted to critical care for internal bleeding. I have tried to keep up with this "helpfulness" from TCP as you call it, and keep my private life utside of this

....but you never addresses the fact that every one of TCP's posts, there is a put down....and that I too can google up as many contradictions to keep up with him...You missed the point completely. And so I feel my time is best spent on what I really love and respect in this life....my own family..


I am going to drop these conversations with you and TCP now because there is a real world with really important things -even life and death issues- that need my attention...All this negativity is not good for anyone....I have tried to be polite, to hang in there, to answer all challenges----but why? For whom? For people that are full of hate and meanness and spite? Naw...That's not good for anyone..least of all for my own family...

Just so you understand why I dont reply, it isn't because you or TCP "won" anything (which you have not by a long shot-further if "winning" was the objective, then you both have the wrong attitude toward our conversations- which further proves my point) . There really are more important things in this world than me standing here repeatedly taking your insults...when I best be surrounded by loving caring supportive and helpful people at a time like this..I'm surprised I hung in this long ....most people would not have under the circumstances (the insults and put downs).

Bye Rain, and do have a nice life. If you can. The picture reminds me of you and TCP....
I hear the job is still open...Maybe you two should apply. It might pay better than 'Mall Cop".

Hey, bring 'em on, the more the merrier.



The only good name you (and these anonymous phantom relatives you keep deflecting embarrassing errors on) are sullying is that of your ancestor David Demarest, who, despite his own worthy achievements, seems less interesting or valuable to you without the ruffles and flourishes of "royal" ancestry, even if it's borrowed.



How can one haggle over facts when all you ever do is dodge them and throw fits?



Oh, now you've gone and hurt my feelings...





Actually, Sue, this is something I do in my down-time, it doesn't take much effort at all. But I can see you're tired, so if you want to discontinue our discussion, I certainly understand.



It isn't my fault that your family name means "of the marshes", nor that Maretz, France was actually Maretz, Spanish Netherlands at the time of David Demarest's birth. Those small inconsistencies are troublesome, I'll admit, but the only reason you're angry with me is that I brought them up.



I guess I'm not the first mall cop to bust an old lady for shoplifting who rationalizes her misdemeanor by saying she's entitled to free samples.



I'm glad you realize that now, Sue. It was about exposing yet another in a long, sad series of "bloodline" hoaxes. I guess you only admired it when the focus was on someone else; now that the focus is on you you're finding it all too uncomfortable. Not very good judgment on your part, Sue.



Well, thank you, Sue - and good luck in your negotiations with the Catholic Church to open all those Merovingian tombs at Saint-Denis for DNA extraction!



Not something you'd have to worry about, Sue, unlike you I don't review books out of spite that I haven't read.



Wow, a speech delivered to the Holland Society of New York in 1886 - the Gilded Age of genealogical embellishment!

Let me direct your attention back to the book reviews of A Huguenot on the Hackensack - David Demarest and His Legacy:

http://www.daviddemarestbiography.com/

Winner of the National Huguenot Society's Book Award for 2008

A Huguenot on the Hackensack is the first full-length study of David Demarest, an early European settler of northeastern New Jersey and progenitor of a large and locally influential family. The book examines Demarest’s life, the legacy of his family, and the wider “Jersey Dutch” community in which the family played a prominent part. The book looks beneath accumulated layers of legend and older historical interpretations to formulate a new and more realistic (and more interesting) account of Demarest’s life and legacy.

(Not more interesting to some of his descendants, however)

The book covers Demarest’s life, starting with his birth in the French province of Picardy, through his sojourns in Middleburg (Netherlands), Mannheim (Germany), Staten Island and New Harlem, and finally the French Patent along the Hackensack River in New Jersey. New evidence and new interpretations provide a picture of Demarest as an ambitious and upwardly mobile entrepreneur with an unusual talent for balancing risk and opportunity, and a dedicated churchman and community leader under both Dutch and English rule. The book next considers the Demarests in the eighteenth century, when the family rose to prominence in Bergen County. It concludes with an assessment of the Demarest family’s American experience. Demarest’s life and legacy will be of interest not just to the large number of his descendants and the numerous descendants of other Jersey Dutch families, but more broadly to those interested in regional history, New Netherland, and American social history.

Oh but wait, wait...I've found something interesting in another review of the biography:

http://www.fdupress.org/book_reviews_scholarly/9780838641521_David_M_Riker_-_The_Holland_Society_of_New_Yo.html

A Huguenot on the Hackensack does not provide the reader with any information about David Demarest other than what has already been uncovered in Europe, and that is very little. The first, and most important, of those records is of David's 1643 marriage in the Walloon Church in Middleburg, Zeeland, The Netherlands (Walloons were French Protestants from the area of present-day Belgium who were driven into exile by the Spanish). The record indicates that David's father's name was Jean des Marets and that David's place of origin was Beauchamps, presumably a place in the province of Picardy, France. His wife was called Marie Sohier.

Yes, Beauchamps was and still is a place in French Picardy, in the Department of the Somme, in the Arrondissement of Abbeville - on the Atlantic coast. Nowhere near Maretz in the Cambresis, I'm afraid, but the wetlands are probably quite beautiful.

It looks as though the Major brothers did indeed do their homework, and were not ignorant of the old family myths, but rather they set out to dispel them and uncover the truth.

No wonder they got an award for the book.

TCP

Brilliant TCP. It's all in a days work I'm impressed.

Blah, blah, blah. Nice pic though. I'll keep that one for my collection

No, TCP....They did very inconsistent and scattered research.....STARTING WITH HIS BIRTH IN THE FRENCH provence of PICARDY..... and the family before then? Although records exists and continue to be added, they included not a word...they picked their starting point......it was an arbitrary decision...they could have gone further back ....Now you are also denigrating the Dutch Historical Society and determining they have less credibility than authors whose greatest achievement was to get an award from a Huguenot Society/ .....perhaps you should go to Holland and see if, and how many of those records they have amended...not one I would wager..


About the 'swamps" of Picardy that you show no understanding of....or selectively posted negative things as a deliberate act to decieve.....had you done your research instead of narrowing it down to these attacks, then you would have found this:



Basically, this supports every claim the family makes to being related to Godfrey de Bouillons and other crusaders. This also supports the birth certificates and family relationships..that they began as the same tribe-family! Research that while you are at it, TCP..I can barely touch the surface of so much information to reprint here,,..

TCP said:" Sue, unlike you I don't review books out of spite that I haven't read." TCP, this is a Complete lie and another attempt to discredit and disparage.

Or we can consider this remark from TCP: "and good luck in your negotiations with the Catholic Church to open all those Merovingian tombs at Saint-Denis for DNA extraction!"

It was an idea I suggested as part of the DNA Project......based on the courtesy calls that I made while in India..and this was suggested to me by someone at Nat Geo.. the fact that I had met with the Protestant Church in India to ask if there would be any reservations about obtaining DNA from the Roza Bal...I also had to meet with Mullahs from the local mosque and Hindu-Brahmin priests to see if there were any objections (religious or otherwise) from any of them..and these were included in my draft for the Nat Geo Project.....If I thought it was relevant, of course I would also posit the idea to any other Church group if tombs of saints were being opened for DNA..It would be rude and inadvisable NOt to include them! Clothilde was a Queen who was later sainted..I have no idea if her tomb is still intact...but I would certainly ask the Church their position on these matters, even if the the tomb was now an historical site under French control..I have never got that far outside of India, so I really dont know what to expect..

I do know that everything posted here brings us back full circle to exactly the same places in France... Godfrey de Bouillons was also known as the Duke of Lower Lorraine. His mother was the famous Saint Ida, and his brother was Count Eustace 111 of Boulogne. But Bouillon was also part of this Picardy region! And so was Cambray and so was Maretz.. The name "Picardy" referred to a Frankish tribe and also applied to all lands where the Picard language was spoken, which included all the territories from Paris to the Netherlands. (This includes the Nord-Pas-de-Calais area, location of the Marets and also Beauchamps ) So they were all the same TRIBE-they began as the same FAMILY!


Now we get to the real issue here, the thorn in TCP's side that he just cant let go of...and it spoils all his judgement:



So......You took it upon yourself to "expose" another in a long line of hoaxes?

That tells us all we need to know...and to explain all these past dialogues with you.

A hoax is a deliberate effort to deceive...and it is plain and in print that the "others' were caught in deliberate deceptions. When you lump me in the same category.....you do me and yourself a great injustice....You are deceiving everyone with your very bad "research" into thinking it is very good research and I am deceiving them(?) You tell a lie to cover the lie to cover your motives. I realized you were deliberately twisting things to fit your agenda ...but I was always doubting myself and trusting you.....until now...I realize now that you were deliberately twisting at every opportunity to get in those digs and remarks..to be sure at the end (and an end would have to come eventually) you could point these out and brag what a great dragon slayer you are! this is far worse "research" than anything you accuse me of..this is not research on your part, but an ego problem that clouds your judgement as you try to twist everything to fit your agenda for the ending you have predetermined..

You made a decision to attack me regardless what I say or what I bring to the table...Your goal was to beat someone up and crow...Stop pretending it had anything to do with "research"....what you are doing is not research.

I have lost all respect for you TCP....you are no researcher in any real sense of the word.
You are just a bully in self posturing clothing..needing to stroke your own ego by inventing "causes" that you will defend..it's all in your own head.. not in anyone else's...well....maybe you've got a touch of rain in there too....

Waiting for them to get in the last word.......coming soon in one....two......three......and counting.

Oh, really? You know these guys? You have their book? I'm ordering it and it will be my pleasure to cite quotes from it - chapter, verse and footnotes. Like any ethical researcher would do, they started with the earliest known record of their subject and resisted making unfounded assumptions on information not contained in that record - unlike a certain famous genealogical fabricator apparently hired by some of their kinsmen a few generations back to publish their vanity genealogy. The "scattered and inconsistent" approach would have been to simply repeat the same myth. Perhaps when they found David Demarest's actual place of birth on his marriage record (something Louis Piers de Boer must have deliberately ignored) they realized there was no basis upon which to claim any relation to the family of the same name from the Cambresis, given that the two locales are quite distant from one another.



It's actually the Holland Society of New York and I doubt very seriously they'd go to bat for an essay they published in 1886 if subsequent research has been done that contradicts it. And, frankly, given the subject and scope of the work, an award from the Huguenot Society is nothing to sneeze at.



And how do you figure that?



Yeah, right. You just file frivolous lawsuits.



My goodness, how the story keeps evolving! How do you keep all the revisions straight in your head, Sue? Rhetorical question - obviously you don't, which is why you just keep digging the hole deeper and deeper.



The same TRIBE?

Maybe you need to see it plotted on a map, Sue:

https://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=Bouillon,+Belgium&daddr=Maretz,+France+to:Beauchamps,+France&hl=en&ll=49.894634,3.273926&spn=3.5389,7.064209&sll=49.560852,3.570557&sspn=3.563302,7.064209&geocode=FWjO9wIdp19NACnrlj1wunvqRzEmRCsiU2ae-w%3BFXqkwId6SY0ACmp_N7gA5zCRzGgYWSBPvEKBA%3BFe0y-wIdxQcXACm_kol4W__dRzFAHmKBPvEKBA&oq=Beauchamp&mra=ls&t=m&z=7

(Sorry, I don't know how to make it appear as an image, but here's the URL to Google Maps)

Point A is Bouillon, Point B is Maretz, Point C is Beauchamps. It's 97 miles between Bouillon and Maretz; 106 miles from Maretz to Beauchamps. These places aren't exactly adjacent. And no, Bouillon isn't in Picardy.



The only one here engaged in deception is YOU, Suzanne Olsson. With all of my "very bad research" I include URLs so that anyone following this discussion can see what I'm finding and evaluate it themselves. You don't. Instead you weave an ever-evolving tale about "family Bibles" and unnamed "family members" hoofing it all over northern France scouring little villages and old churches for records that OF COURSE "prove" your statements are "factual" - and then get on your high-horse when information found on the Internet (and I claim no special prowess here, anyone who can operate Google can turn up the same information) contradicts you. Then you bitch and moan about being "attacked" when in fact YOU are undermining YOURSELF by throwing tantrums and constantly changing your narrative when you can't sustain it any longer.

Now, do I believe you fabricated this genealogical fantasy yourself? No, I do not. I can see for myself that it existed from at least 1886. Do I believe you are largely ignorant of historical details that render your understanding hopelessly flawed? Yes, I do. But you've created a personal narrative to go along with it that frankly I find terribly unlikely. I can't blame you for doing everything in your power to try to save the family legend EXCEPT for inventing misleading details and constantly revising your story whenever you hit a roadblock. That qualifies as deception, even if it's only self-deception since I really don't believe anyone else here is falling for it.



Sorry you stepped on a land mine and it blew up, Sue. Be more careful in your future endeavors.



Anyone that's known me in this particular genre for the last two decades knows that I'm a hardcore skeptic and no pushover. Sorry it took you this long to find that out for yourself.

TCP

YOu are no skeptic...don't over rate yourself...you are a bully with an agenda....I posted information about Picardy that destroyed the so-called research you posted prior...and yet you never mentioned that,....never accepted that you were wrong..nor about their leaving due to religious persecution....you weren't the least interested in any facts..nor where they come from...Links? You want me to include links here? Why bother? It isn't your goal to examine any of them.. you have a different agenda..If you want to know more...go look it up for yourself..It's easy enough to find with a simple google, just like rain said...But I doubt that you ever will.

For example, you posted how many miles it was from location to location....but that's not what your original statement was....your original statement was about another Maretz being in a different location...another swamp in Picardy, you presumed . That insinuated that my branch of the Maretz family were somehow not worthy...not historical.not even from the same swamp! ...obviously you hadn't even known where or what Picardy was before then! And neither did the authors of the Huguenot book. OOps. Slight issue there with your research!

You are the big deceiver here Tim...you and only you. And you said "I didn't mind standing on the sidelines while others got attacked?" Hmmmm I think it's pretty obvious now who was doing that attacking..I was on the sidelines but I was getting all the blame... In my opinion, I think that you set me up Tim...to cover your own trail of character destruction against 'another author'..I have suspected that for many years. And with all your admissions here on these threads about all the people you successfully attacked, it certainly fits in with your character (or lack of)...speaking of "frivolous lawsuits" yup. I see how that all fell into place very nicely to cover your trail!

I think by now the pattern is obvious to everyone, and it aint called research! ...I loath answering you...but you bully and lie so much that it needs addressing....you must always get in the last punch..it's an ego thing with you. Reminds me of boxing rings..last man standing is the winner....except that you use words instead of punches- knowing they can hurt just as effectively...and every comment you make is geared to hurt..to denigrate.. to destroy in order for you to boast...to crow..typical Tim...but those are the "compensation" techniques of men who feel inadequate, and such techniques are very telling in and of themselves..

but now it's time again for you to get the last word in! and counting one...two...three...Hurry Tim, Hurry!

Can't read that rubbish anymore. Sorry, Shasta, I'm putting you on ign... Got to concentrate on substantial issues.

You're deranged.



No, I found the Maretz you were referring to, and there's only one, the small commune in the Cambresis. I never said anything about "another" Maretz. Unfortunately your ancestor wasn't from there, or anywhere near there. I illustrated the distance in miles between Bouillon, Maretz and Beauchamps to counter your argument that they were somehow adjacent. Clearly they're not, anyone viewing that map can see that for themselves. Sorry you find that so difficult to cope with.



You're certifiably insane. I set you up? You got your knickers in a twist over your bizarre contention that KM stole your idea for what turned out to be nothing more than shameless and baseless self-promotion on both your parts. You provoked her. You attacked her anonymously. You filed a lawsuit against her. She counter-sued, your attorneys asked you to put up your house as a guarantee that they'd get paid for what even they could see was a losing suit. I distanced myself from you because I could see then that you're mentally unstable and dangerous. Now I can see why. You weren't making "Merovingian" claims about YOURSELF back then, it was supposedly all on behalf of some little girl in India, the daughter or granddaughter of someone you know there. Now, of course, we all find out in explicit detail that it was always about YOU and your sick fantasies.



Yeah, right, you "loathe" answering me. What BS. You love and crave any attention you can get, anything that affords you the opportunity to play the victim and the martyr.



Just keep provoking, Sue, you do it so well!

TCP

Tim, your attacks, your accusations, your "research"...it's all exactly the same way you tackled KMG and others..
And she once thought it was me? I bet she doesn't feel that way now.

the pattern of yours is the same for years and very clear now....It was you and it still is you...Me, Dangerous?
You bet. I see right through your games now....and I have lost all respect for you.

Picardy was and still is a district defined by the early Franks who settled there and spoke one language---they were one family, one tribe..they settled parcels of land and identified each with a name of their parcel, their home. Thus we arrived at ...Marets, Bouillon, Chambrai, et cetera..there is no other place in any French dialect also named Marets..no swamps either...

It had nothing to do with the miles between villages.

I quite understand.....terrible state this thread is in ! You are wise not to get involved...
We can meet again on other threads that are more sane and more about real research...
Best, Shasta

I have ammended this post to include additional information about the lawsuit between Dan Brown and Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh.

Got one better than buying the book...a friend of the authors, and contributor to their original book is now also a member of the Demarest forum and we are having lively exchanges of info! If they could rewrite the book today, there is much they would change as the 'facts' are always in a process of discovery, revision, and evolution.
No one has to lie or invent anything....just update as new info becomes known..which is exactly what we are all doing..

Now let's set the record straight about this lawsuit between Suzanne Olsson and Kathleen McGowan:
Tim said:



Wrong on all counts again....I was in this forum when everything broke wide open about how much of my work appeared in KMG's books...but it was not handled in anger by me..Anyone here can read my older posts and not detect anger.

The anger on her side and mine built up over time as she kept getting attacked and I kept getting blamed...but I knew it was not coming from me. I was willing to take a stand in court to prove that much....so if not me, then who was writing bad reviews and attacks against her?

I know that TCP was a regular contributor of information because he and his family lived and worked in areas close enough to KMG that people knew her personally...they could research claims about her job at Disney, her attempts to publish there, and why she left...her troubles with others such as the Linda Goodman debauch (which ended with Crystal Bush getting the rights), the Wiccan-witch coven stuff..there was more that I don't recall just now, something about a TV personality who almost hired her to write a biography, then backed out of it after just one or two meetings... The point is this: all that knowledge came to us through TCP..

I was publicly blamed when ever she got a bad book review at amazon. I was publicly blamed when someone kept posting negative comments on her guest book (I didn't know she had one until she brought this up in public)..and finally when she accused me of stalking her and threatening to kill her...she made these charges in public (as 'Anna' at the amazon forum followed up with more claims at the Huffington Post). I realized she spun out of control and I HAD TO seek a legal end to the false charges..I was prepared to let years of my internet activity become public...but that meant everyone else's would be public too...that's how the real offenders would be caught..no wonder TCP ridicules attempts to bring everything out in public, and only a lawsuit can do that.
KMG never filed a "counter suite". All I got was a letter in a greasy envelope from a "lawyer' that I immediately sent to the California Bar Association who determined it was not legal. It was sent in a reused envelope that came from a furniture store. I still have it.
I paid $5,000. US dollars to an attorney after I first filed the lawsuit myself to save money. Once a lawsuit is filed, nothing can be changed. The attorney who was hired later advised me that I should have included Simon and Schuster in the lawsuit and it may be dismissed because I failed to do that. Yes, they asked for my home as security towards their fees. The legal fees could have run up into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Lawyers for Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, authors of "The Holy Blood And The Holy Grail," sued Dan Brown and faced legal bills of about $6 million after losing their appeal against publisher Random House Inc. I recall that one of them lost him home to the attorneys for legal fees. By contrast, I was suing McGowan for alleged 'death threats'...thiings she had posted in public and implicated Simon and Schuster by saying they were aware and had to cancel her book tours. These were total fabrications and liable in a court of law. However, because I erred initially by not including S & S, the lawyer kept the $5,000. retainer (plus almost another $5,000. I had paid out in other fees) and so I had no choice but to drop the charges. There was nothing frivolous about this lawsuit. I was not suing McGowan for 'stealing' my ideas. ...this was nothing at all like the Dan Brown case...except the part about the legal fees adding up!

As far as the other allegations TCP made here, and him bragging how he done others in, and lamenting that I can't "take it' ..it suggests to me that he may have been behind a lot of the attacks against McGowan..as I suspected years ago...and now the pattern seems the same here. By TCP's own admission, this is an attack on bloodline "wanna bes" ...and he has lumped everyone together in a basket of 'frauds' that he will heroically expose to the world..

There must be a million people in the world today who share the same lineages that I covered in my theory...now are we to believe that all of them must be excluded from writing about this just because they are in a family lineage that HAS drawn so much public attention? Deliberate frauds and fabrications are one thing...but legitimate questions and queries should not be lumped into the same basket of bad apples.

What has been repeated again and again by me, my book has been an exploration of 'what if'.....How could I possibly make claims that I am accused of here? ...I never did...I have said repeatedly this is what information I have thus far....now.....'what if' ...and carried forward that proposition. I should not be attacked for this. A lot of hard work and good research has gone into my book. Why should I be repeatedly hounded about claims that I never made ...over something that I have made clear is a theory..........not a fact!

I think this has solved a lot of questions and hard feelings that existed between KMG and myself.

Just capturing this before you come to regret posting it and try to delete it, Sue. It's 100% libel and it's actionable.

TCP

Thanks for the laugh this evening. I needed that! Perhaps it is libel and actionable. Would that be before, or after people have read the wicked comments you posted here about me? Should I 'capture' those before you delete or change them?

























Shasta wrote:
As I recall,I wrote that edition in the wake of KMG's claims. I was extremely careful to avoid the pitfalls of making such claims..My intention was never to get attention as a 'Grail Child'...


Oh no, of course not. You just filed a lawsuit against her for doing it after claiming she'd stolen the idea from you.

Shasta wrote:
but rather to advance the idea that DNA might be the best way to go...


And using your own as the control sample for testing, conveniently enough.

Shasta wrote:
and I had no legitimate reason for putting the Project together (remember I was facing fundamentalists who controlled the tomb) except to say that our interest lay in our family name...According to Islamic law, that was/is one of the few reasons they would allow the DNA to be retrieved. So to be very clear, on one hand I avoided making such claims except as generalizations involving the entire family line, and second, I had to make some statements to justify to the Mullahs why they would allow the opening of the grave. It was a fine line, and from the angle of your questioning here, it appears that you think I crossed that line, which was never my intention..


How many Mullahs are you trying to persuade here on the forum, Sue? I guess the Mullahs in Kashmir just took your word for it, yes? Or did you show them Page 3 of your book?














OK Tim Carmain.....I have saved the above quotes....100% liable ones too! And I made corrections to my previous quote..to include mention of the lawsuit between Dan Brown and Beigent...

You have a nice evening .

Atama ii ne TCP, totemo sugoi.

ありがとうございます。

Translations, please.

No, you don't want to know, Serendipity..it's just more insults..

It's a compliment to TCP - It translates in an unusual way, it's more like slang. I'm just saying - Really smart TCP, very, very good(sooooooo kool). (sorry, it's direct translation doesn't really work in English, it's more like I'm saying it to a friend)
And he just said thanks.

You really don't like the Japanese do you Shasta, using their language is not insulting - it's a wonderful language - with many different layers. Like all Asian languages it can be very poetic.