jump to navigation

Steak or Hot Dogs? Joan Wheeler hasn’t a clue what the Sippel kids ate – and this has WHAT to do with her adoption? November 9, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Lies in the book Forbidden Family, Our Family History, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements, Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

From Gert to Ruth:

I just had to address this issue, saw it late last night and stayed up late to do it….so unbelievable even though it is out of sequence I believe that it will serve a purpose… that she is no social worker…so Ruth if you can post this soon….

Joan Wheeler’s book is so full of nonsense it is an overwhelming bunch of garbage.

Taking a peek ahead into the depths of the craziness that Joan has written, I found something that just boggles my mind and felt the need to bring it up now. Chapter 38 is called ‘unequal treatment of 1 half-orphan out of 36 resulted in a traumatic  life outcome – a Social Work Assessment’

It begins with ‘April – July 2009’ meaning of course she wrote it or massively rewrote it just before publication. It continues ‘this assessment is complicated to read, but necessary to understand’. I ask you what has Joan written that has been easy to understand? This entire chapter was an ‘afterthought’ of Joan’s so she could continue with her rants under the guise of ‘social work’. What a joke Joan is! Anyone with or without a degree can tell that Joan is nuts. This is the chapter that she says our father couldn’t understand, which btw caused him to say to others that it belonged in the trash! I’m not ready to comment on this chapter in full…in time it will be addressed…but there is one short paragraph that caught my eye.

Under a title of ‘known and unknown rumors against my natural father’ it defies reason has to what that title or what she has in it has to do with her adoption and how it was an ‘unequal treatment’ and how it resulted in a traumatic life for her, for she wasn’t there. It is Joan’s attempt to prove that her traumatic life is because of all the things she has put into this afterthought chapter.

Steak or Hot Dogs?

I can’t imagine how she can believe or devise these tales but as always she has to put her own spin on it. There are many outlandish tales cooked up by the adoptive family because they had some kind of weird idea about my parents and our economic circumstances and Joan has taken them to be ‘true’ and the reason why she is so traumatized. Bull Shit. Here then is one small paragraph that Joan has written on pg. 542 which caused her trauma!  (Ruth’s note: how in God’s holy trouser’s could what we Sippel kids ate for supper when Joan wasn’t living with us caused her trauma is way beyond me!)

One story that has circulated for decades is that in the years before and after my birth and disappearance to adoption, my father fed my siblings hot dogs while he (and presumably my mother and then my siblings’ step-mother) ate steak. When I asked Dad about this, his explanation made sense to me since I, too, raised children. Parents do their best to provide quality food, but when children prefer to eat hot dogs because they taste better to kids, it is easier for parents to give in than to fight about dinner. There is also another explanation – that my father sent my brother to the Broadway Market to buy hot dogs for dinner. He took his time walking home, eating the uncooked hot dogs on the way. There was no dinner for the rest of the family.’ (Ruth’s note: this sentance makes no sense – it does not compute! – When she says that there was no dinner for the rest of the family – does she mean to imply that my father and mother (or stepmother) ate a steak dinner in front of us kids while we went hungry? HOW DARE YOU JOAN! We kids ate supper EVERY FUCKING EVENING! My father and mother/stepmother  was responsible enough to make sure there was adequate groceries in our house for EVERYONE to eat. Not like JOAN and her ex-husband – in another section of her book she says that money was short that often HER kids had one meal a day. That’s a reflection of JOAN’S poor parenting and financial irresponsiblity! She couldn’t feed her kids? Yet she had money to zip around the place attending adoption conferences! Or going to rock concerts! But when money was short, and HER kids ate only one meal a day – did she get off her lazy ass and get even a part time job in the evenings at the Tops Supermarket one mile from her house? Before Joan starts painting the Sippel kids as deprived, she needs to take a close look at how she treated her own kids – like crap!)

This is pure hogwash! I haven’t a clue how she could possible believe such a tale and then put it in a book about her adoption! The basic true story was related from birth relative to adoptive relative and then turned into totally false-hood by the adoptive relatives for reasons of their own. But Joan NEVER researched the truth of the story and instead adds things on, that are of course not true and embellishes it with her own ‘time period’ thought patterns. 

One can tell that it is another ‘Joan centric’ tale because she starts it out with her birth and ‘disappearance to adoption’ as if B.J. (before Joan) had some kind of great turning point in the way our family lived.

Here is the truth and beginning of the tale: My father was raised an only child after an elder brother died. His mother was very protective of him and of his health in particular. She always maintained that her son should have the iron in steak so that his blood was strong and he would not become weak like the son that she had lost. When my father and mother married, his mother would bring a steak to my mother, every week, telling her it was for her son. My mother, being a good daughter-in-law, thanked her mother-in-law and put the steak in the freezer till she had enough to feed the entire family. There is nothing more or less to the story, simply that my mother was no fool. She knew enough to keep her family fed with or without the additional weekly steak that her mother-in-law, my grandmother gave her.

Most of the time during and after my mother’s illness and death we children lived with or were taken care of by our grandparents. Then Dad remarried and his mother came again to her new daughter-in-law, my stepmother with the ‘steak’ for her son. This did not go over well with my stepmother and it was probably she who fed us other meat, again, because she was the wife and in charge of the household and kitchen, not my father.

What Joan tells in this tale is not true and it suffers greatly from total fabrications. She says that she asked Dad about this, well I have no way of knowing if that is true or not but it seems that even if he attempted to give an explanation of it that explanation was embellished by Joan. Dad is a guy and some guys just don’t think about how and what kind of food got on the table. Joan doesn’t think! In the 1950s the world was different, the husband gave the wife the ‘grocery money’ and that was that. So Dad did not feed his kids anything, his wife did! And he ate what was put in front of him!

Joan states, ‘Parents do their best to provide quality food, but when children prefer to eat hot dogs because they taste better to kids, it is easier for parents to give in than to fight about dinner.’ This is Joan’s inner mind working again, subjectively and certainly putting words into someone else’s mouth. This might have happened in Joan’s home with her adoptive parents and then with her children but it certainly didn’t happen in my father’s home. This statement is an editorial comment, has nothing to do with the story at all. Joan was NOT THERE, she would not KNOW that as a child, in my father’s household, if you didn’t eat what was put in front of you, you stayed there all night till you ate it and if you didn’t you had it for breakfast, or, you went without and went to bed hungry!  (Ruth’s note: This is correct, not only in our house, but our grandmother’s house, and in the foster home that we were in for a few years. This is why I will not eat, to this day: oatmeal, lima beans or brussel sprouts. The women in our lives, our father’s mother, our step-mother, our step-grandmother and our foster mother, were strict. They did not cook a meal only to have a child waste it).

Here are some other very important facts that Joan does not know about. While there was the Broadway Market it was not in the neighbor and my father would never have sent my brother or any of us there to purchase anything. There was a local butcher within 4 blocks from home where we went for meat. Joan doesn’t know that because she wasn’t there and the adoptive relatives were not there! All she and they know is the Broadway Market!

Joan then continues saying about my brother that, ‘He took his time walking home, eating the uncooked hot dogs on the way.  There was no dinner for the rest of the family.’ Again, made-up, sounds more like something The Beaver would have done, but not a real kid who was sent to the store to get something. If anyone of us did such a thing forget about dinner, which was called supper at our house, you would have been sent to bed with a ‘licking’.  (Ruth’s note: again, the women in our lives were strict – we got a good smack on our backside when we misbehaved. Something more kids need in this world of kids AND adults not having any self-control or sense of self-responsibility).

Joan knows nothing about what happened in our family because she either wasn’t born yet or she was adopted out as an infant. (Ruth’s note: this sentence makes perfect sense to me – how the hell does Joan know what we Sippel kids ate for supper? SHE WASN’T THERE! I WAS! I KNOW WHAT WE ATE, WHAT WE DIDN’T EAT – AND HOW OUR FAMILY EXISTED! AND SO DOES GERT AND SO DOES KATHY – NOT JOAN. Joan keeps saying that her adoptive family, both her parents and the extended Wheeler family LIED to her about her adoption, and the existence of her siblings. How does she know that they weren’t also LYING to her about our family life? And how the hell do THEY know about it? THEY were NOT part of our family growing up! The only contact between the two families was my mother’s sister Catherine – and she raised her kids the same dam way – her husband always had liverwurst sausage in the fridge and limburger cheese – and NOBODY touched them! – and by god NOBODY touched Uncle Ray’s stuff! BUT, I ate dam well at Aunt Catherine’s house and I ate the same food that my cousins Norman, Ida and Gail had! – so this bullshit about what we Sippel kids ate came from the LYING WHEELERS! – And they sure taught Joan how to lie).

These tales are fabrications told to her by her adoptive parents and Joan hasn’t got the good sense to keep them out of print. She really ought to be ashamed of herself. She really ought to go after her adoptive relatives and leave the birth sisters alone.

(Ruth’s note: a competent social worker would know not to publish “urban legends” such as the steak/hotdogs or Butch eating hotdogs walking down the street. Better still, a COMPETENT social worker would get to the root of the “urban legend.” But since Joan DIDN’T bother to consider a family anecdote that sprang from either a faulty memory, or out-and-out LIES from her adoptive family, this clearly shows us that Joan is no dam social worker).

Addendum from Ruth:

I have already addressed this family anecdote about us Sippel kids eating hotdogs in my post Photos from the Past  March 15, 2010. You have to scroll down to see what I wrote. But to save you the trouble here is what I wrote:

Joan also says on page 542 that our father fed kids hotdogs while he (and presumably my mother and then my siblings’ step-mother) ate steak. This is a family anecdote that Joan in her “brain fog” has gotten wrong.

What happened was this: my father’s mother was from the old-school, she would send over a steak every Friday for my dad. My mother, and then later my stepmother would say “thank you,” and put it in the freezer and the next week, another steak would come, and then we all would eat steak. and yes there were times that we kids would eat hotdogs.

As to the next “story” that my father sent my brother to the Broadway Market for hotdogs, and he ate them on the way home, leaving no dinner for the rest of the family, this makes no sense. Broadway Market was 2 and a half long blocks up Smith St. and then 5 short blocks over. There was Matty’s Deli right around the corner if we needed something in a hurry. Besides, there was Loblaw’s at the corner of William and Emslie only 5 blocks away and Joan was not there, I was. I went shopping every week with my stepmother. We had money for dinner people. come on. What Joan is doing is having “brain fog” in hearing another family anecdote that my brother was sent to the store and probably did eat the hotdogs. I WAS THERE, I HAD DINNER EVERY NIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH! (Ruth’s note, November 8, 2010 – Gert is right – we did call it supper in our house. My husband John and I call it dinner in these present days of 2010).

And if we were so “poor” how come we had one cat, 2 parakeets, turtles, fish, Visible V8 Engine set, chemistry sets, build your own radio kits, a backyard gym/swing set, electric football game, kitchen sets with hoses to a bottle to supply running water, the first Easy Bake oven, Chatty Cathy dolls, Nancy dolls, Janet Lennon dolls, Elsie the Cow doll, some doll, if memory serves, The Breck Doll, sponsored by Breck shampoo, where you learned to style hair, and these weren’t Barbie doll sized, but big – their heads were at least 3 or 4 inches across! I had a Drink and Wet doll who was at least 15 inches long! The first Lite Brite sets. Sno-Cone set. I had a chair and desk set with reversible top – chalkboard on one side, artist easle on the other, paint by number sets, the original Cootie and Mr. Potato-Head.

AND we had our living room set from Ethan Allen furniture (NOT cheap) – colonial style! with a couch that opened to a bed. Colonial style rocking chair, coffee table (of which I had until the early 80’s), colonial style dining room furniture, of which I have TO THIS DAY, one of the chairs – it’s sitting four feet away from me right now! I vividly remember being with my step-mother and step-brother bringing home the living room lamps from downtown Buffalo, Hens and Kelley. AND if we were soooo poor, how come every week, my step-mother took me, my brother and stepbrother downtown to the movies, usually to see the new sci-fi, stuff like “The Cosmic Man” “Hypnotic Eye” “Attack of the 50 Foot Woman”  “Invaders from Mars” “Darby O’Gill + the Little People.”  We saw Fantasia, went to the circus, I vividly remember not liking the clowns and my stepmother holding me. And all the junk we brought home. I also vividly remember my stepmother taking ME alone to see the brand new Hayley Mills film, The Parent Trap. My brothers and I had Roy Rogers capgun sets, complete with belts, which my grandmother didn’t like. Rubber Jim Bowie knives, Davy Crockett hats. I had a Howdy Doody doll who came to the hospital with me when I had my tonsils taken out at 7 years old, where I threw a temper tantrum because they shut my tv off just as Chuck Connors The Rifleman came on! (I had to leave my rifle home, dad wouldn’t let me take it).  All these brand new toys, and pets, but we were poor? I DON’T THINK SO!

(Ruth’s note, November 8, 2010: The Wheelers [but I suspect it all came from Mama Wheeler] thinks we Sippel kids were soooo poor. We came from the “inner city?” Oh yeah? Well, so did THEY! We lived on Smith St. They lived on Coit St. – ONE BLOCK OVER, TWO BLOCKS UP! So Dorothy/Doloris (yes, she goes by two names), take your suburbian snootiness and shove it – ‘cos you came from 3 blocks where we lived – THE INNER CITY!)

And pray tell: what does all this have to do with the supposed purpose of the book Forbidden Family – Joan’s adoption, Joan’s reunion with us and adoption reform? – ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!

Gert – November 9, 2010

Ruth states:
‘And pray tell: what does all this have to do with the supposed purpose of the book Forbidden Family – Joan’s adoption, Joan’s reunion with us and adoption reform? – ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!’

True, absolutely nothing! Joan is totally against any form of adoption, because, she was adopted and her adoptive parents, lied to her, kept secrets from her, betrayed her and when she was ‘found’ by birth relatives, her adoptive family further betrayed, lied and harassed Joan for having a birth family. Nasty business for sure from the adoptive family, but hey, that is not the birth family’s blame.

Joan repeats, at nauseum, her tramatic life as a basis for adoption reform. NO! Joan’s life is what it is because of Joan, NOT adoption. It’s about time that Joan got out of the fog and get the hell over it! She was dealt a raw deal, well she isn’t the only one. She is suffering now because she CAN’T stand the fact that three birth sisters are finally able to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Joan get a life before you find your self on your death bed all alone and wondering how you got there with no one!

This blog will continue to truth tell and refute everything in that book of garbage!

New whine by Joan Wheeler – and how she shifts the blame off herself onto other people. September 15, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Contradictions of Joan Wheeler, Joan Wheeler Speak - how Joan views the world, Joan Wheeler's abuse and harassment of her birth family, Refuting Joan Wheelers statements.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

A few days after her lie on August 25, 2010,  Joan makes another rambling whine. And contradicts herself again. On August 25, she says we’ve been attacking her physically for 30 years, then on Sept. 1, she’s back to saying there’s been no contact.

She also says the reason she wasn’t posting was because of me. Oh, but didn’t she say back in May she wasn’t posting because she was busy with getting her amom into the nursing home, doing all the stuff necessary for legal stuff with the house, and daily visits to her amom, etc. etc. etc. NO WHERE IN MAY WAS I MENTIONED AS THE CAUSE OF HER NOT POSTING! SHE SAID SHE WAS BUSY. Now she would have you believe it’s all my fault. See how she blames me for her life? Oh, give me a break! – she said that our blog was upsetting her, but not preventing her from posting. – remember the whine and plea for help “get them away from me, get them away from me.” um, Joan, be Woman – get us away yourself. Stand up on your own 2 feet. Because the only person who created this mess is –YOU. You wrote the book, not the adoptees.

There seems to be only a handful of  buddies who support her. And apparently an administrator was ticked off because a link was made to our blog back in the original plead for help for Joan – made by a buddy of Joan’s back in February 2010 .But then more links are put up – does Joan not listen when the administrator obviously doesn’t want no links? Then Joan sloughs the blame off herself and onto her buddy! well, technically, yes, it was Joan’s buddy who did post it – BUT IT WAS AT JOAN’S BEHEST! Now, can you people see how you are being deceived, manipulated, and USED by Joan? She wants YOU to clean up her mess! She lies about people, gets upset because the people she lies about are angry, but instead of acknowledging her contribution to the anger, or cleaning it up herself – she goes whining to other people, expecting them to do battle for her. baa baa sheep. I told you guys before: PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT SHE SAYS, BECAUSE SHE SAYS ONE THING ON A MONDAY, AND A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THING ON FRIDAY!

 And by the way, I do NOT use my employer’s computers – I have my own personal laptop. Again, people are being deceived by Joan. How does she know what I use? Is she there? No? Did she see me? No? Then how do you know what I do? Because Joan told you? Joan is a proven liar!

And no, there is no threat from me or my sisters to Joan or to the adoptees. I said it in my last post – this blog is for the purpose of finding Joan Wheeler’s lies, putting those lies straight, and refuting her contradictory lying statements. If you examine this blog – The Three Sippel Sisters are not interested in, nor posting anything to do with adoption issues, EXCEPT when they pertain to OUR FAMILY. We may give our personal postition on adoption, based on our personal experience, but we are not joining, nor condemning, any adoption, adoption reform, OBC reform, or anything else related to adoption.

As to Joan’s reaction to my angry posts: what did she think was going to happen? Has she not learned the rule of cause and effect? You tell a lie about someone, and they might get angry!

 JOAN TAKE THE CONSEQUENCES OF YOUR ACTIONS! YOU TOLD A LIE ON AUGUST 25, 2010 – DON’T GO WHINING BECAUSE THE PERSON YOU LIED ABOUT SHOWED THEIR ANGER. IF YOU HAVE THE GUTS TO GO ON THE INTERNET AND LIE, THEN BE WOMAN ENOUGH TO SUCK UP THE BAD KARMA YOU INFLICTED ON YOURSELF. NOBODY PUT A GUN TO YOUR HEAD AND FORCED YOU TO TYPE THAT LIE. YOU KNOW DAM WELL NOBODY IN THE SIPPEL FAMILY OR HERR FAMILY EVER PHYSICALLY ATTACKED YOU. YOU SAY THERE IS NO CONTACT BETWEEN US – THEN HOW CAN THERE BE PHYSICAL ASSAULTS???? YOU SURE CAN DISH OUT THE LIES, BUT YOU CAN’T TAKE THE CONSEQUENCES OF THOSE LIES. SUCK IT UP BABY, SUCK IT UP!

There really is a very simple solution to this Joan – and that is for you to STOP LYING!  And stop whining when you are caught in your lies!

and Joan, would you get your lies straight? If we have been nothing but trouble since 1974, why do you have a whole chapter in your book about your wonderful visit to Kathy in England, the Star Trek  Convention in 1975 with me? Why was I one of your bridesmaids? You mention great times you and I had at the beach in the 80’s with your babies. Meeting herman’s hermits at Uncle Sam’s nightclub.

as for the child abuse call – it was made by YOU in December 1994. In the book you say it was made in December 1993. Now in your whine it was made in 1996!

can’t you make your mind up?

remember the old saying about telling the truth – because then you don’t have to remember the lies? Joan, Joan, JOAN,——— STICK TO THE TRUTH – because you put your foot in your  mouth SIX  TIMES in your whine. you are getting things mixed up because you can’t keep your lies straight.

and no, I, Ruth Pace did NOT call child abuse on Joan. Joan did that herself in a pathetic attempt to break me and my husband up. THINK! people think – If I’m going to place a false child abuse call against Joan, I’m not going to give them my real name AND name my own husband as the perpetrator- I’ve known John since 1978 – we were best friends! In 1986, we were both single and then became romantically involved. In 1987 we moved in together. In 1996, we bought our house off our landlord and in 2002, we got married! WHY WOULD I CALL CHILD ABUSE AND NAME HIM AND RISK HIM GOING TO JAIL WHEN THIS IS THE MAN I LOVE???? AND AT THE TIME OF THE CALL (DECEMBER 1994)  WE WERE PAYING $360.00 RENT TOGETHER, WHICH I WOULDN’T BE ABLE TO AFFORD BY MYSELF IF HE WAS IN JAIL!!!!!! And Joan right away writes him a letter, sends it to his mother’s house and URGES HIM TO LEAVE ME.

 — 

 

 

Comment by Gert McQueen, September 15, 2010:

In processing out the lies and misrepresentations that Joan has in her book, hard evidence, namely letters, have come to surface. They will ALL be posted on this blog to show that Joan indeed is the intimidator and manipulator of many many dirty deeds that she SAYS comes from her birth sisters.

Even without hard evidence, Joan has done many many dirty deeds to her birth family. Joan is not innocent. Our sole intent here is to reclaim our own honor back from the dishonor that Joan has written, in the book, and elsewhere, about us.

As early as this morning, as I read in Chapter 33 of her book…for I am indeed writing my rebuttals…I find yet again, more lies and misrepresentations. Joan makes up so much drama that she TRULY BELIEVES her own shit!!

Anger? oh yes, we have anger, but it is not anger that is driving us to refute Joan’s versions of our lives. It is the very fact that Joan has sullied and garbaged up every member of her birth family, including our father…who wants NOTHING to do with her for the shit she continues to do to the family…as recently as just a couple of years ago, as the damn book was going to press.

So Joan and friends, there is NOTHING you can say or do that will stop us from exposing Joan for all she has dumped on us.

Joan wrote the book, she told the lies, she now has to deal with those she dishonored.

additional thought by Ruth, September 15, 2010, 10:30am –

Joan doesn’t get to be angry. She is the one who keeps spreading lies and untruths. If her lies are slapping back in her face – well that’s just too dam bad, now isn’t it? no, Joan, YOU don’t get to be angry. You are playing with the big girls now. And big girls don’t lie, they tell the truth. And truth ALWAYS wins out.

ok, here’s another contradiction she makes in her whine – she says she is looking for a job, but with crap like our blog, prospective employers will be offended. then she says later down, that she is very sick with illnesses and cannot work full time or at all.

 
 

 

ok people – look at what she is writing – because you’re not seeing it! Many people don’t ‘read’ clearly, they miss alot, they don’t ‘read between the lines’ they make assumptions, they label…wrongly…
 
That’s how they get caught off guard, because they were not paying attention in the first place. that is Joan’s whole problem and her undoing. Sure, right, she is looking for a job and she has to blame it on us…before hand…that she won’t be able to get a job because of us. This is Joan manipulating you again. She is laying the groundwork that if she doesn’t get a job it’s because of us. (thanks Gert)

Speaking of “poor little Joanie’s reputation” – What goes around comes around. Back in autumn 1994 – early 1995, Joan accused me of hacking into my employer’s computer and messing up her bill. The hospital investigated, traced it down to a typing error and told her I didn’t do it. I work as a nurse’s aide NOT a billing clerk as Joan says in her book. I work the night shift – 11pm – 7am. (Dory – what time was it when motor33 applied? AFTER 10pm, right?) I am not in the building at 4pm when the typo happened. They do have the technology to see what people do on computers. And I’m still working there, I didn’t get fired, because I didn’t do anything. But Joan wasn’t going to have it. – She was going to change the FACT that I didn’t do it, so she called the hospital EVERYDAY FOR SIX MONTHS, calling the nursing office, calling the different nursing units badmouthing me – telling people that didn’t even know me – that I was a bitch, do they know what kind of people they have working for them – this is a dam hospital – where we are taking care of sick people, saving lives, and Joan is bothering busy people during the daytime with this shit, trying to make me look bad and lose my job. So now, 15 years later, SHE’S worried about prospective employers thinking SHE looks bad? What Joan did to Ruth 15 years ago is coming back to haunt her! KARMA BABY, KARMA! SUCK IT UP!!!! – You didn’t care about RUTH’S reputation with her present employers, so why should anyone care about YOUR reputation with prospective employers..

And please people THINK! She says each time they are posting their hate filled crap.
No, Joan – YOU are the one who posts the hate filled crap. We are merely answering you. We do not say anything to anything you have to say in general – ONLY to those things you say about US!

And perhaps the adoption issue in our family has affected us – but what has affected us even more is the continued TRASHING OF US that you keep doing! Why, Joan, WHY, must you keep making up stories about us? WHY do you say that you have been physically attacked for 30 years by us when you know that that is NOT TRUE? Do you see anything on my blog about ANYthing you have said on the internet in the past month? EXCEPT that lie? You have things on your blog about the ACLU, a letter to somebody called Debbie Jacobs, you’ve given support to forum members, urged others to write about an adoption issue – has ANYthing been said about those things on this blog until now? And they are being brought up as an example. NO, the only time we say anything is IN ANSWER TO YOU!And this whole blog IS AN ANSWER TO YOUR BOOK! You had a choice when you wrote your book – you could have chosen to write a truthful insightful book. Instead you wrote a trashy LYING book.You have a choice in the here and now. Continue your writing for your interests or continue writing LIES about your family.

The ball is in your court Joan. And stop playing your little games. We can see what you’re up to – bah – you’re looking for a job and if you can’t get one – it’s my fault! BALONEY! You’re not looking for a job – you said before you are permanently disabled and on SSI. and you just said in your whine you are “sick with illnesses and cannot work full time or at all.”
Do you see what a snarky snake Joan is?

and meaning no disrespect here, but if Joan’s amom is on the path to leaving this world (she has been doing this since last October when Joan first said this on the comments for the  ABC or CBS interview Adoptees Face Sting of Discrimination), Joan says in her whine that she needs to pay attention to her amom. Well then, Joan, PAY ATTENTION TO HER. Why are you on the internet telling lies about your birth family and your birth sisters in particular? Do you not have something much more important to do?

But of course, see how Joan BLAMES us for HER life? Oh yes, WE are driving to her house everyday, dragging her out of bed, forcing her to her computer, forcing her to sign on, forcing her to google her own name, forcing her to put her fingers to the keyboard, forcing her to type her lies, when she is supposed to be taking care of her mother. Riiiiiiiggghhhht. Dammit Joan, would you PLEASE take accountability for YOUR OWN ACTIONS! STOP BLAMING ME AND MY SISTERS FOR EVERY THING IN YOUR LIFE! IF YOU GET A DAM ZIT ON YOUR FOREHEAD – I GUESS THAT’S MY FAULT TO!

Gert – September 15, 2010

I want to make this perfectly clear…

Adoption, pro or con, reform or not, has nothing to do with why us, the birth sisters, are refuting Joan’s book and everything else she says about us, anywhere, which we will continue to do until we die or Joan pulls the book and gives us a public apology.

Joan recently said that ‘adoption is the reason we are the way WE ARE’. That is a patent falsehood! Adoption has nothing to do with it. Adoption is WHY JOAN IS THE WAY SHE IS.

We sisters are setting the record straight as far as what Joan has done to us, individually and collectively and to how she has presented our family. Our positions are all about Joan, not adoption. So please, get off the point that we give a damn about adoption…we DON’T. We are not concerned with any issue related to adoption, outside of our personal opinions which are a non-issue here.

Our issues are all about Joan’s lies, fabrications, manipulations, intimidations, and all sorts of techniques to get her way and to lay blame on others and not onto herself. Our issues are to restore our personal lives from the garbage that Joan has presented. It is an honor issue, not an adoption issue.

Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler should be revised January 22, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Lies in the book Forbidden Family.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
comments closed

This blog dedicated to my mother and my father. And my son. For their honor.                          Blood is not enough. You have to earn it.                      Respect gets you points. Disrespect gets you demerits.  What will you have placed on The Scales of Ma’at?                   sister site: The Three Sippel Sisters  I am who I am. I say whats on my mind. – You don’t like that? oh well! no skin off my back. lol.

new post:  gosh, I hit a nerve. settle down Potsie!  posted February 26, 3:30 pm   click on title or scroll down past this “sticky” post!

amended post: Forbidden Family, by Joan Wheeler pages 316, 324, and 330 Clear evidence of lies January 28, 2010, clarification of what ACD means in legal terms and proof that Joan is a filthy liar, RE: me being placed on probation. ACD means Adjournment in Consideration for Dismissal, a far cry from probation.

Okay, I think I need new glasses.  What I read this morning was actually posted on January 13 2009, a year ago. lol.  Or maybe I was having a senior moment. I don’t know. But anyways, I’m  going to leave this post up in it’s entirety. Because I think what I write is a clear consice listing of just a FEW of the lies that I have found in the book Forbidden Family by Joan Wheeler. I have discussed all of these things in much greater detail elsewhere in this blog. So  if the following list intrigues you, go get yourself a cup of java, herbal tea, maybe something stronger. Get comfy and start reading. And if any of my relatives (and I know some of you are visiting), want to borrow the actual book, just let me know.

Forbidden Family is currently being revised. So it was reported on January 13 2010. (geez, I can’t believe I read that wrong).  Duh!

Word of advice to Joan Wheeler: GET THAT PICTURE OF ME AND MY SISTERS OFF YOUR BACK COVER. YOU NEVER GOT OUR PERMISSION TO USE OUR PICTURE.

More words of advice: STOP SLANDERING AND LIBELING ME.

You better get the facts straight this time.

YOU DID NOT GET MULTIPLE ORDERS OF PROTECTION AGAINST ME OR MY SISTERS.

I WAS NEVER ARRESTED.

I WAS NEVER PLACED ON PROBATION.

I NEVER CALLED CHILD ABUSE ON YOU.

*THERE WAS NO “THREE MONTHS OF COURT BATTLES” IN 1993 OR 1994. OR 1997 (as you report last month to justanswers.com – what’s the matter? Can’t get your lies straight? Pick a year, any year, it’s all a lie!)  — Question – in your book you say the court battle was in summer of 1994 over the phoney child abuse call in December 93. I have posted the here in this blog, letters written by YOU, Joan Wheeler to the Child Abuse department in Albany New York, dated December 31, 1994 about the call made in December 1994. I have also scanned and posted letters written by YOU, Joan Wheeler dated December 1994 and March 1995, concerning this child abuse call, and sent to MY fiance. You sent those letters to his mother’s house and was trying to break him and me up. (didn’t work). GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT. IF YOU WANTED TO WRITE A SERIOUS BOOK, BE SERIOUS. IF YOU WANT PEOPLE TO TAKE YOU SERIOUSLY, GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT. AND GET YOUR LIES STRAIGHT.

I DID NOT SEND YOU THAT DISGUSTING MR. CLEAN NOTE.

PROFESSOR RENE HOKSBERGEN NEVER CAME TO MY HOUSE. I NEVER YELLED AT HIM.  I NEVER YELLED AT YOU IN FRONT OF HIM. HE NEVER MET MY HUSBAND.

WE SIPPEL CHILDREN AND OUR STEPBROTHER J.G. NEVER WITNESSED OUR FATHER’S SECOND WIFE BEING PUT IN A STRAIGHTJACKET AND PUT SCREAMING IN AN AMBULANCE.

I WAS NOT DRUNK WHEN I CALLED YOU IN 1972 TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU WERE LIVING.

MY FATHER WAS NOT COERCED INTO GIVING YOU UP FOR ADOPTION.

MY FATHER DID NOT ALMOST BURY MY MOTHER IN THE NUDE. (you slimeball).

MY FATHER’S NEPHEW DID NOT ALMOST PUNCH HIM AT MY MOTHER’S FUNERAL.

MY SISTERS AND I ARE NOT HARASSING YOU OR INTERFERING WITH YOUR LIFE, YOUR CHILDREN OR YOUR MOTHER.

YOU ARE THE ONE WHO IS SENDING HARASSING LETTERS. LIKE THE LETTER YOU SENT ME TO TELL ME MY HUSBAND GOT THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR PREGNANT. AGAIN, GET YOUR LIES STRAIGHT. YOU TOLD ME IN SAID LETTER THEY HAD A BABY GIRL IN 1994. NO, THERE WERE ONLY 2 BABIES BORN TO WOMEN IN THAT HOUSE, 1987 (year we moved there) to January 2009 when the house was demolished. AND BOTH THOSE BABIES WERE BOYS. DANNY M. AND JESSE S. (note, I will be reposting my post concerning this lie and reposting the actual letter Joan sent to me.)

I NEVER CALLED YOU AT YOUR BOYFRIEND BRIAN’S HOUSE. (sorry, didn’t know the phone number). AS FOR THE “BORROWED” MONEY, YOU LIAR: YOU AND YOUR HUSBAND STOLE IT FROM ME FROM OUR JOINT CHECKING ACCOUNT. YOU DIPPED INTO IT TO FIX YOUR CAR WITHOUT MY PERMISSION. COLBY TOOK 500 BUCKS TO BUY FIREWORKS, (with my permission) BUT NEVER REPLACED IT. HE BLEW IT AT THE STRIP JOINT AT THE CORNER OF TRANSIT AND GENESEE. (pig). MY MONEY WENT FOR HIM TO GET HIS ROCKS OFF AT A STRIP JOINT!!!

I DID NOT GO INTO YOUR ATM AND TAKE MONEY OUT OF YOUR BANK ACCOUNT THREE TIMES AND BOUNCE YOUR RENT CHECK, YOUR SLIMEY HUSBAND DID THAT. AND I GOT THE BLAME FOR IT. YOU ARE BOTH PIGS.

YEAH, THE STUPID ARSEHOLE. AGREES TO BE INTERVIEWED ON CAMERA ABOUT HIS ADDICTION TO STRIPPERS. A COLLEGE STUDENT MAKING HIS CLASS PROJECT, A FILM ABOUT STRIPPERS AND THE MEN WHO GO TO STRIP JOINTS. AND COLBY ADMITTED ON CAMERA THAT HE WITHDREW MONEY FROM THE ATM THREE TIMES AND BOUNCED A RENT CHECK. HE ADMITTED THAT HE LIES TO HIS WIFE ABOUT HIS PAYCHECK AND MONEY AND TAKES THE MONEY AND BLOWS IT AT THE STRIP JOINT. WHEN JOAN SAW THIS COLLEGE STUDENT’S FILM ON A PUBLIC ACCESS CABLE CHANNEL AND FINDS OUT THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER, DOES SHE APOLOGIZE TO ME FOR BLAMING ME FOR GOING TO AN ATM AND STEALING FROM HER? HELL NO.

MEANWHILE, HIS CHILDREN HAVE NO CHRISTMAS PRESENTS SO MONEY THAT WAS PROMISED TO BE REPAID TO ME FROM YOUR THEFTS HAD TO GO TO THEM. YEAH, AUNT RUTH PROVIDED CHRISTMAS 1990 TO JOAN’S KIDS, WHILE RUTH’S CAR WENT UNREPAIRED (because we couldn’t afford it) AND RUTH AND UNCLE JOHN WAS FREEZING AT THE BUS STOP THANKS TO JOAN AND COLBY: LIARS, THEIVES AND DEADBEATS. (can we say thank you to Aunt Ruth kiddies for your Christmas that year, that she never intended to provide? ) No? Yeah, go ahead and believe your lying mother. She gave birth to you. Providing Christmas for you is HER responsibility, NOT MINE. BUT I WAS FORCED INTO IT. BECAUSE JOAN AND COLBY PROMISED THEIR HALF OF THE LAWYER’S REFUND BUT THEN JOAN CALLS ME UP AND DICTATES TO ME THAT THEY WERE GOING TO KEEP IT. TO BUY CHRISTMAS PRESENTS FOR HER KIDS, WHILE HER WORKING HUSBAND WAS BLOWING MY MONEY AND HIS FAMILY’S MONEY AT THE STRIP JOINT. Joan and Colby: sleazeballs. And Colby comes to my house the second week of December 1990 with a lousy TEN BUCKS. (like ten bucks will go far in fixing my car). He then whines to me, “Can’t you just accept half (of the lawyer’s refund), I don’t want to go home and hear Joni yell.” CAN WE SAY PU–Y-WHIPPED? — oh yes we can, because he lists on his facebook he likes domination. lol. BUT I DON’T. I DON’T LIKE THE FACT THAT MY MONEY WAS STOLEN FROM ME DESPITE THE FACTS THAT THESE TWO LIARS PROMISED ME I WOULDN’T LOSE ANY MONEY THRU THE REAL ESTATE CONTRACT, THEY USED ME. THEY TOOK MY MONEY FOR THEIR CAR REPAIRS (and they had two vehicles, yeah, and we had only one, then NONE when we couldn’t afford to fix it. We had to take it off the road, why pay insurance when we couldn’t drive it. Then we couldn’t come up with the repair money OR insurance because we were busy paying back the bank that they money was borrowed from in the first place. And I lost hundreds more dollars in interest and penalties.) THEY STOLE MONEY FROM ME THAT WASN’T EVEN MY MONEY! I HAD BORROWED IT. AND COLBY THE PIG USED THAT MONEY FOR HIS PLEASURE.

 WE WERE COUNTING ON THE LAWYER’S REFUND TO FIX OUR CAR, BUT THANKS TO YOUR LYING, THIEVING PARENTS, “UNCLE” JOHN AND ME WENT FREEZING AT THE BUS STOP.  JOAN HAD A NICE WARM CAR TO DRIVE AROUND IN,  COLBY WAS HAVING FUN AT THE STRIP JOINT WITH MY MONEY, WHILE I WAS LUGGING HEAVY GROCERIES ON THE BUS IN THE SNOW. AND JOHN AND I WERE TAKING THE BUS BACK AND FORTH TO WORK. YEAH, WE GO TO WORK, NOT LIKE SOME LAZY PEOPLE WHO JUST SIT BACK AND WHINE ABOUT THEIR LACK OF MONEY. GET A JOB. SHE IS NOT DISABLED. SHE HAS IRRITABLE BOWEL SYNDROME AND ALLERGIES. IF SHE CAN TYPE AT THE COMPUTER ALL DAY MAKING UP LIES, SHE CAN TYPE FOR A PAYCHECK.

And speaking of stealing, why don’t you tell  people how YOU STOLE THE BEADS OFF MY MOTHER’S WEDDING DRESS. AND IN YOUR BOOK YOU SAY YOU HAD THE DRESS FOR 4 WEEKS, NOPE, IT WAS MORE LIKE 5 YEARS.

So what are going to put in your revised book? mmm? THE DIRTY LITTLE SECRETS YOU HINT AT THAT WE THREE SIPPEL SISTERS ARE AFRAID OF? MMM? Got news for you baby, WE ARE NOT AFRAID OF YOU. GO AHEAD. REVEAL AWAY.

REMEMBER LULU’S IN KITCHENER ONTARIO? 1984? mmmm?

The Triple Filter Test before saying something about anybody January 16, 2010

Posted by Ruth in Dreams, Inconsistent Angel Things.
Tags: , , , , ,
comments closed

In ancient Greece (469 – 399 BC), Socrates was widely lauded for his wisdom.

One day the great philosopher came upon an acquaintance who ran up to him excitedly and said, “Socrates, do you know what I just heard about one of your students?”

” Wait a moment,” Socrates replied. “Before you tell me I’d like you to pass a little test. It’s called the Triple Filter Test.” “Triple filter?” “That’s right,” Socrates continued. “Before you talk to me about my student let’s take a moment to filter what you’re going to say. The first filter is Truth. Have you made absolutely sure that what you are about to tell me is true?”

“No,” the man said, “actually I just heard about it and…”

“All right,” said Socrates. “So you don’t really know if it’s true or not. Now let’s try the second filter, the filter of Goodness. Is what you are about to tell me about my student something good?”

“No, on the contrary…” “So,” Socrates continued, “you want to tell me something bad about him, even though you’re not certain it’s true?” The man shrugged, a little embarrassed. Socrates continued. “You may still pass the test though,because there is a third filter – the filter of Usefulness. Is what you want to tell me about my student going to be useful to me?” “No, not really…”

 “Well,” concluded Socrates, “if what you want to tell me is neither True nor Good nor even Useful,! why tell it to me at all?” The man was defeated and ashamed. This is the reason Socrates was a great philosopher and held in such high esteem.

Lesson to be learned Ms. Joan M. Wheeler!!!!

%d bloggers like this: