Nanaweedkiller and Terry Polevoy and TrueHope's Victory

When Terry Polevoy / Stephen Barrett and Team get desperate ... out
from the shadows pops Willa Nidiffer, reposting lies and libel about
me ... one of their many Publicists and her main job on Usenet.

http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.or...weedkiller.htm

Though quiet for a while ... they are manning their forces against me
on Usenet once again. When I catch a moment, Ill update my webpages
and add one solely dedicated to Polevoy. He has several with his one
sided version of this case ... backed by those mentioned by below.

http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.or...WatchWatch.htm

Willa Nidiffer / Weedkiller's Main Handler for whom she advertises ...
Stephen Barrett, recently lost all appeals on his SLAPP suit against
me ...

His Malicious Prosecuting Attorney ... Christopher Grell sued me for
libel and conspiracy for libel when I had never mentioned his name ...
he was, according to the court records chastized in Court for doing
this. He dropped his case against me ONLY after being reminded by a
Judge he had no case against me ... although he had months and months
to do so until then.

Today, another she advertises for, Terry Polevoy (who was caught
donning the disguise as "Vera Teasdale" on this newsgroup attacking
me and Dr. Hulda Clark) ... meets me in the Supreme Court of
California.

The case is whether REPOSTING POTENTIALLY LIBELOUS material on the
internet is actionable ...

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/polevoy.htm



They use such notable PR flacks as "Cathy Credulous" aka Willa
Nidiffer aka Nanaweedkiller and disbarred and totally discredited
former NY attorney, Mark S Probert to advertise for their side and
attack me and any close to me. They frequently post and repost libel
about me ... so should the court rule in Polevoy's favour ... I will
have court backing to go against them for the libel they have reposted
repeatedly and under various anonymous names.

Recently, Polevoy aka "PigPills Polevoy" because of the poorly written
anti science diatribe against EmpowerPlus he names "PigPills" ... had
his years of harassing and attempting to harm the reputations of those
scientists researching alternatives to dangerous pharmaceuticals
overturned.

Although briefly victorious in pushing Health Canada to have the
research stopped, a new decision overturns that travesty.

And thanks to Weedkiller for reminding me about a letter Polevoy wrote
to MY attorneys. Ill dig it out and repost it on a new webpage Ill
make about him now that his Team is back on the group battling against
me.

Health Canada betrayed trust
http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnis...0/1766563.html



Tide turns in power struggle

http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnis...0/1766561.html

Sun, August 20, 2006


Tide turns in power struggleAlberta court victory big step for
embattled depression-fighting supplement

By Licia Corbella



In three days, Gloria Steinlein will celebrate the 51/2 year
anniversary of "not being crazy."

"Not that I'm counting or anything," she says with a cheery laugh,
"but February 23, 2001 -- the day I started taking Empowerplus -- is
the day that saved my life -- literally," says the 25-year-old from a
central Alberta town who has a thriving foot-care home business during
the day and is a bartender by night.

When Steinlein was 16, she went from being a popular straight-A
honours student to becoming so depressed she ended up dropping out of
school and spending much of her time on suicide watch in Alberta
hospitals.

She was diagnosed with "major depressive disorder" at first, and at
the age of 18, a psychiatrist diagnosed her as an "indifferentiated
schizophrenic."

She was on dozens of medications -- as many as 30 at a time --
including antidepressants, anti-psychotics, anti-anxiety medications,
blood pressure and heart medications and eventually medications to
deal with the Parkinson's Syndrome she developed as a side effect from
all of the drugs she was on. Despite this, her hallucinations and the
voices in her head got worse, not better. What's more, the formerly
90-lb. girl ballooned to almost 200 lb. as a result of the
medications, though now she's back to a svelte 120 lb.

"I didn't know who I was or where I was most of the time. I didn't
recognize my own parents. My mom would come to visit me in hospital
and I just thought she was a nice lady."

That went on for four-and-a-half years.


Just before Christmas 2000, Steinlein made a very serious suicide
attempt by swallowing several bottles of Thorazine. Upon her release,
a former fellow patient from the psychiatric ward at the Red Deer
Regional Hospital contacted Steinlein's parents and told them of a
vitamin and mineral supplement developed by two southern Alberta men
that had rendered him more stable than he'd been in years.

Steinlein's parents, Klaus and Christine, asked their still-suicidal
daughter if she would meet with Tony Stephan and David Hardy, the
founders of the company Truehope and the product Empowerplus.

"We were all very skeptical," admits Steinlein. "After years of taking
every medication out there and progressively getting worse, it's to be
expected, I guess."

Steinlein started taking the vitamins and minerals that initially
heightened her symptoms and side-effects from her pharmaceutical
drugs. She decided to stop taking her pharmaceuticals and within days
she started feeling better.

"Within a month, I felt totally fine and I've never had a relapse
since and it's been five-and-a-half years."

Steinlein is one of 10,000 people taking Empowerplus with similar
remarkable results.

And now a Calgary judge's court ruling has further legitimized
Empowerplus.

In a July 28 ruling, Alberta Provincial Court Judge Gerald M. Meagher
determined Truehope was not guilty for not having a Drug
Identification Number, and in fact, he found the conduct of Health
Canada -- which seized the supplement as it crossed into Canada from
the U.S. where it is made -- was "vexatious."

He also ruled Stephan and Hardy were entitled to the 'defence of
necessity' since expert testimony at the two-week trial showed "if the
supplement became unavailable, symptoms associated with depression and
bi-polar disorder, which would include aggressive behaviour, assaults,
hospitalizations and suicides, would return," wrote Meagher in his
ruling.

One of the more interesting expert testimonies at the trial, which
took place from March 13-29, came from Dr. Charles W. Popper, a
professor of psychiatry at Harvard University and a private
practitioner in psychiatry with a specialty in child psychiatry and
child and adolescent psychopharmacology.

Popper was even more skeptical about the claims of Stephan and Hardy
than Steinlein at first. After being invited by two of his colleagues
to hear the two men, along with Dr. Bonnie Kaplan, a psychologist from
the University of Calgary, who was undergoing clinical trials, Popper
reluctantly went.

"But as I listened to them, they made some claims about this treatment
that struck me as pretty obviously ridiculous," Dr. Popper testified
under questioning by Truehope's defence lawyer, Shawn Buckley.

Claims like 80% of all mentally ill people who try Empowerplus improve
"significantly" had Popper leave the meeting one hour earlier than
planned. Before he left, however, Hardy forced a bottle of the
capsules on the skeptical doctor, who then hid the bottle in his coat
and then behind books in his office.

Shortly afterward, as a favour to a colleague, Dr. Popper agreed to
see a severely ill 10-year-old boy -- the son of another psychiatrist
and social worker -- who was having four-hour tantrums every day for
the past four months.

After they essentially pleaded with him to do something for their son
between their next assessment, Popper shrugged, told them of the
supplement and made no promises.

After four days, the father called saying " 'the tantrums are gone,
not better, not a lot better, gone. And that the kid wasn't even
irritable,' " testified Dr. Popper.

Dr. Popper now has about 150 patients on Empowerplus and they are so
stable, he has been able, for the first time in 20 years, to see new
patients.

Another 300 to 500 of other physicians' patients who consulted with
him are also doing well on the supplement.

Meanwhile, after being shut down by Health Canada, Dr. Kaplan has
resumed her clinical trials into the product at the U of C.

"The normalization of the mentally ill via nutrient supplementation
has the potential to be the most significant breakthrough in the field
of mental health since the beginning of time," says Dr. Kaplan.

As for Steinlein, she thinks Stephan and Hardy should win the Nobel
Prize for Medicine for what they have done.

"Without (Empowerplus) I wouldn't be here, guaranteed," says
Steinlein.

"I wouldn't have made it past that year, I know that for a fact. I
would have killed myself or the medications would have done it for me.
Empowerplus is a miracle."

For more information about Empowerplus, call 1-888-878-TRUEHOPE
(1-888-878-3467) or log onto www.truehope.com


~~~~~~~~~~~

Coming:

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/Polevoy.htm

"Ilena Rose" wrote in message
...

The case is whether REPOSTING POTENTIALLY LIBELOUS material on the
internet is actionable ...


Ethically, the reposting of something written by another is potatoes. After
being told the information (whether written by oneself or another) is bogus,
the action of continuing to repost it (again and again and again) is the
meat of the matter. [Arrogant, Low-class and ill-bred behavior.]

"Coleah" wrote in message
...

"Ilena Rose" wrote in message
...

The case is whether REPOSTING POTENTIALLY LIBELOUS material on the
internet is actionable ...


Ethically, the reposting of something written by another is potatoes.


Why?


After being told the information (whether written by oneself or another)
is bogus,


Bogus??? How so? Who said it's bogus? The court didn't seem to think so!
Health Canada doesn't seem to think so! On what authority or whose sayso do
you say it's bogus?


the action of continuing to repost it (again and again and again) is the
meat of the matter.


I guess the truth must bother you and the fact that you or the rest of
Barrett's gang can't do much to refute the truth outlined therein is really
the nub of the matter isn't it? This your great loss in Canada must be like
holy water in your devil's face.


[Arrogant, Low-class and ill-bred behavior.]


Speak of the devil! Speak of yourself. This seems to be you all over from
what I've seen of you.

"vakker" wrote in message
news:ZRhLg.519096$IK3.410537@pd7tw1no...
"Coleah" wrote in message
...

"Ilena Rose" wrote in message
...

The case is whether REPOSTING POTENTIALLY LIBELOUS material on the
internet is actionable ...


Ethically, the reposting of something written by another is potatoes.


Why?
People do it all the time (with credit for/from the original author)....
potatoes = no big deal.


After being told the information (whether written by oneself or another)
is bogus,


Bogus??? How so? Who said it's bogus? The court didn't seem to think so!
Health Canada doesn't seem to think so! On what authority or whose sayso
do
you say it's bogus?


The California Court of Appeals said the federal law doesn’t protect people
who intentionally post a defamatory comment while knowing or having reason
to know the statement is false (is that enough 'authority' for you?) Why do
you think Rosenthal then appealed to the state high court?


the action of continuing to repost it (again and again and again) is the
meat of the matter.


I guess the truth must bother you and the fact that you or the rest of
Barrett's gang can't do much to refute the truth outlined therein is
really
the nub of the matter isn't it? This your great loss in Canada must be
like
holy water in your devil's face.

Let me guess.......you are in Canada, you sound bitter and could be a
broadcaster on the 'radio' ?


[Arrogant, Low-class and ill-bred behavior.]

Speak of the devil! Speak of yourself. This seems to be you all over from
what I've seen of you.

Say, are you some kind of a controlling, religious fanatic????
Kiss, kiss.

"Coleah" wrote in message
...

"Ilena Rose" wrote in message
...

The case is whether REPOSTING POTENTIALLY LIBELOUS material on the
internet is actionable ...


Ethically, the reposting of something written by another is potatoes.
After
being told the information (whether written by oneself or another) is
bogus,
the action of continuing to repost it (again and again and again) is the
meat of the matter. [Arrogant, Low-class and ill-bred behavior.]


The meat of the matter is whether Ilena justifiably believed it to be true
or not. I think the police said so and the stalkee said so so she had good
reason to believe it was true. She thought the charges were true and I
predict that's what the court will find. That means no malicious intent
which means she is innocent of all charges.

If it is libelous I guess some of you guys have got a lot to answer for.
Better hope Ilena doesn't lose.

Considering Polevoy's proclamation's of innocence in this stalking matter,
we all know OJ was guilty don't we?

"Coleah" wrote in message
...

"vakker" wrote in message
news:ZRhLg.519096$IK3.410537@pd7tw1no...
"Coleah" wrote in message
...

"Ilena Rose" wrote in message
...

The case is whether REPOSTING POTENTIALLY LIBELOUS material on the
internet is actionable ...


Ethically, the reposting of something written by another is potatoes.


Why?
People do it all the time (with credit for/from the original author)....
potatoes = no big deal.


After being told the information (whether written by oneself or
another)
is bogus,


Bogus??? How so? Who said it's bogus? The court didn't seem to think
so!
Health Canada doesn't seem to think so! On what authority or whose sayso
do
you say it's bogus?


The California Court of Appeals said the federal law doesn't protect
people
who intentionally post a defamatory comment while knowing or having reason
to know the statement is false (is that enough 'authority' for you?) Why
do
you think Rosenthal then appealed to the state high court?


Let's see what the supreme court will say. If she loses then I guess some of
you people are gonna be in for it considering some of the libelous things
you have said about her(and other's)!





the action of continuing to repost it (again and again and again) is
the
meat of the matter.


I guess the truth must bother you and the fact that you or the rest of
Barrett's gang can't do much to refute the truth outlined therein is
really
the nub of the matter isn't it? This your great loss in Canada must be
like
holy water in your devil's face.

Let me guess.......you are in Canada, you sound bitter and could be a
broadcaster on the 'radio' ?

You maybe think I'm Ms McPhee? And no I'm not bitter at all. You guy's and
your man Polevoy got his ass kicked badly in Canada in the recent Truehope
decision and some people at Health Canada may very well have to answer for
their actions in listening to the pimple doctor's prescription regarding
Empower.





[Arrogant, Low-class and ill-bred behavior.]

Speak of the devil! Speak of yourself. This seems to be you all over from
what I've seen of you.

Say, are you some kind of a controlling, religious fanatic????
Kiss, kiss.


Like Quackwatch maybe? No.

"vakker" wrote in message
news:MpkLg.508489$iF6.74956@pd7tw2no...

"Coleah" wrote in message
...

"Ilena Rose" wrote in message
...

The case is whether REPOSTING POTENTIALLY LIBELOUS material on the
internet is actionable ...


Ethically, the reposting of something written by another is potatoes.
After
being told the information (whether written by oneself or another) is
bogus,
the action of continuing to repost it (again and again and again) is the
meat of the matter. [Arrogant, Low-class and ill-bred behavior.]


The meat of the matter is whether Ilena justifiably believed it to be true
or not. I think the police said so and the stalkee said so so she had good
reason to believe it was true.

You only 'think' ? So you don't know.
After years of observing Ilena's demonstrated research abilities to dig deep
for information on her various *Mine Enemies*, and asking others for
verification of their statements....I would think she would have verified
the accuracy of her own statements.

She thought the charges were true and I
predict that's what the court will find. That means no malicious intent
which means she is innocent of all charges.

Wonder how 'malicious' Ilena's 'intent' might be construed
about statements of fact she made about someone who was
very publicly labeled by Ilena herself as her *Mine Enemy* ????

Gives rational thinkers such a warm and fuzzy feeling.

"Coleah" wrote in message
...

"vakker" wrote in message
news:MpkLg.508489$iF6.74956@pd7tw2no...

"Coleah" wrote in message
...

"Ilena Rose" wrote in message
...

The case is whether REPOSTING POTENTIALLY LIBELOUS material on the
internet is actionable ...


Ethically, the reposting of something written by another is potatoes.
After
being told the information (whether written by oneself or another) is
bogus,
the action of continuing to repost it (again and again and again) is
the
meat of the matter. [Arrogant, Low-class and ill-bred behavior.]


The meat of the matter is whether Ilena justifiably believed it to be
true
or not. I think the police said so and the stalkee said so so she had
good
reason to believe it was true.

You only 'think' ? So you don't know.


I'm not quite sure what the police thought in the matter. I think they
believe he did it but couldn't prove it or something. We all know OJ was
guilty don't we? Any similarities between him and Polevoy you think?


After years of observing Ilena's demonstrated research abilities to dig
deep
for information on her various *Mine Enemies*, and asking others for
verification of their statements....I would think she would have verified
the accuracy of her own statements.


Do you think she may have set a trap for countersuits for you guys? It could
be if a ruling goes against her she will then undoubtedly turn around and
use it against you guys.



She thought the charges were true and I
predict that's what the court will find. That means no malicious intent
which means she is innocent of all charges.

Wonder how 'malicious' Ilena's 'intent' might be construed
about statements of fact she made about someone who was
very publicly labeled by Ilena herself as her *Mine Enemy* ????

Gives rational thinkers such a warm and fuzzy feeling.

In that she considered him to be what she termed *Mine Enemy* it shows she
believed him to be a despicable man with despicable tactics(as demonstrated
in the Truehope Empower affair in which he has two suicides on his hands) so
it's all the more reasonable that she would believe he could and did stalk.

In any case would you agree that after your latest debacle in a Canadian
court that Quackwatch and Polevoy are basically without credibility in
Canada anymore and are finished there?

"vakker" wrote in message
news:BdpLg.509403$iF6.218684@pd7tw2no...

"Coleah" wrote in message
...

"vakker" wrote in message
news:MpkLg.508489$iF6.74956@pd7tw2no...

"Coleah" wrote in message
...

"Ilena Rose" wrote in message
...

The case is whether REPOSTING POTENTIALLY LIBELOUS material on the
internet is actionable ...


Ethically, the reposting of something written by another is potatoes.
After
being told the information (whether written by oneself or another) is
bogus,
the action of continuing to repost it (again and again and again) is
the
meat of the matter. [Arrogant, Low-class and ill-bred behavior.]


The meat of the matter is whether Ilena justifiably believed it to be
true
or not. I think the police said so and the stalkee said so so she had
good
reason to believe it was true.

You only 'think' ? So you don't know.


I'm not quite sure what the police thought in the matter. I think they
believe he did it but couldn't prove it or something. We all know OJ was
guilty don't we? Any similarities between him and Polevoy you think?


After years of observing Ilena's demonstrated research abilities to dig
deep
for information on her various *Mine Enemies*, and asking others for
verification of their statements....I would think she would have
verified
the accuracy of her own statements.


Do you think she may have set a trap for countersuits for you guys? It
could
be if a ruling goes against her she will then undoubtedly turn around and
use it against you guys.

Malicious entrapment? Wow.
That ought to go over big with the court.
Intent and all that.....




She thought the charges were true and I
predict that's what the court will find. That means no malicious intent
which means she is innocent of all charges.

Wonder how 'malicious' Ilena's 'intent' might be construed
about statements of fact she made about someone who was
very publicly labeled by Ilena herself as her *Mine Enemy* ????

Gives rational thinkers such a warm and fuzzy feeling.

In that she considered him to be what she termed *Mine Enemy* it shows she
believed him to be a despicable man with despicable tactics(as
demonstrated
in the Truehope Empower affair in which he has two suicides on his hands)
so
it's all the more reasonable that she would believe he could and did
stalk.

Intent, intent, intent.
Such a dramatic view. Soap opera fan?


In any case would you agree that after your latest debacle in a Canadian
court that Quackwatch and Polevoy are basically without credibility in
Canada anymore and are finished there?

I think perhaps you have me confused with someone who actually follows all
that "altie" intrigue. Although Ilena has advertised certain people to be
'joined at the hip', does not make it so. I post from the breast implant
newsgroup, where (IMHO) Ilena Rosenthal has been a public embarrassment to
our cause, while making a **** poor excuse as a (never implanted herself)
'self-appointed' breast implant advocate.

"Coleah" wrote in message
...

"vakker" wrote in message
news:BdpLg.509403$iF6.218684@pd7tw2no...

"Coleah" wrote in message
...

"vakker" wrote in message
news:MpkLg.508489$iF6.74956@pd7tw2no...

"Coleah" wrote in message
...

"Ilena Rose" wrote in message
...

The case is whether REPOSTING POTENTIALLY LIBELOUS material on the
internet is actionable ...


Ethically, the reposting of something written by another is
potatoes.
After
being told the information (whether written by oneself or another)
is
bogus,
the action of continuing to repost it (again and again and again) is
the
meat of the matter. [Arrogant, Low-class and ill-bred behavior.]


The meat of the matter is whether Ilena justifiably believed it to be
true
or not. I think the police said so and the stalkee said so so she had
good
reason to believe it was true.

You only 'think' ? So you don't know.


I'm not quite sure what the police thought in the matter. I think they
believe he did it but couldn't prove it or something. We all know OJ was
guilty don't we? Any similarities between him and Polevoy you think?


After years of observing Ilena's demonstrated research abilities to dig
deep
for information on her various *Mine Enemies*, and asking others for
verification of their statements....I would think she would have
verified
the accuracy of her own statements.


Do you think she may have set a trap for countersuits for you guys? It
could
be if a ruling goes against her she will then undoubtedly turn around and
use it against you guys.

Malicious entrapment? Wow.
That ought to go over big with the court.
Intent and all that.....




She thought the charges were true and I
predict that's what the court will find. That means no malicious
intent
which means she is innocent of all charges.

Wonder how 'malicious' Ilena's 'intent' might be construed
about statements of fact she made about someone who was
very publicly labeled by Ilena herself as her *Mine Enemy* ????

Gives rational thinkers such a warm and fuzzy feeling.

In that she considered him to be what she termed *Mine Enemy* it shows
she
believed him to be a despicable man with despicable tactics(as
demonstrated
in the Truehope Empower affair in which he has two suicides on his hands)
so
it's all the more reasonable that she would believe he could and did
stalk.

Intent, intent, intent.
Such a dramatic view. Soap opera fan?


In any case would you agree that after your latest debacle in a Canadian
court that Quackwatch and Polevoy are basically without credibility in
Canada anymore and are finished there?

I think perhaps you have me confused with someone who actually follows all
that "altie" intrigue. Although Ilena has advertised certain people to be
'joined at the hip', does not make it so. I post from the breast implant
newsgroup, where (IMHO) Ilena Rosenthal has been a public embarrassment to
our cause, while making a **** poor excuse as a (never implanted herself)
'self-appointed' breast implant advocate.


I understand the stuff "rots' in your body! Ain't there something wrong with
that? Besides, whats wrong with your breast the way they are? You think
intelligent men want "big ones"?