It was a bit of a surprise to find JREF interested:
I suppose understandable considering Bobert and Craig Ranke's history.
However Bobert--and others-- are mistaken in some of their equivocating. Mr. Ranke, presumably of his own volition,
published CIT's website contact phone number, which it shares with the
corporation Inspiriant Solutions. Being a corporation, it's information and activities,
by definition, are the business of the public.
Ranke's behavior--sic
using his CIT website to publish and encourage others to publish information indiscriminately about private and public people who disagree with his theories--and verges on criminal and liable behavior. His actions are definitely is part of the description of cyberstalking:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CyberstalkingEncouraging others to harass the victim. Many cyberstalkers try to involve third parties in the harassment. They may claim the victim has harmed the stalker or his/her family in some way, or may post the victim's name and telephone number in order to encourage others to join the pursuit.
(italics mine)
Mr. Ranke by using Inspiriant's phone number, has put Inspiriant at risk for future damages . There are two possible interpretations to these events--
either CIT is a front for Inspiriant Solutions and Ranke has their blessing and protection to "call out" his "enemies" using information obtained by stalkers;
Or,
Mr. Ranke had no permission whatsoever to use Inspirant Solutions phone number as CIT's contact phone and, by his actions, is putting a legitimate bushiness at risk.
This situation bears
no resemblance to the one described here:
http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=32724#32724where, apparently, an activist was harassed at his work place
for activities that were not criminal, nor liable and had no connection to his place of employment(though how the employer was found in this case is still unclear).
Do people really need to have a map drawn to see the difference? In one case public information is given so anyone targeted by this bollox can have
legal recourse? The other one is a specious invitation for a stalking free for all? All I can figure is some people are working overtime to keep other people confused. It's the MO of those who doesn't want anything actually done about CIT's behavior--it's not like an alternative is being proposed.
This has happened before. Paula Gloria thought it was a clever idea to hassle an activist once:
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/2008/05/harassing-911-activists-example-2.htmlI recall someone starting to whinge about the information in that blog. They said it was the same as what the "no planes" stalkers said--we found it in public so we can use it. And he was correct one must be careful not to confuse "found in public, but unknown to the person" and actual public information either published by that person or is the public's business(like any corporation). But there was no confusion--except for what he was trying to make.
Paula Gloria, herself, published that information on her own website. Only thing I can figure, is that individual was concern trolling because it was his "job" to discourage anything that might actually work...
None of this is new. And here we come to the meat grinder.
There are some gross misconception about the state of 911truth and 911 activism, particularly on-line. Some people think it's like this:
Good lord no. Those people are actually organized and taking care of each other.
Most "leaders" want you to believe it looks like this:
Yes, that would be lovely. But it's actually this:
Blood and guts and gore. Confusion, random casualties, conflicting orders, little disciple or training, no leadership to speak of--and bad advice in abundance.
This is the Meat Grinder--and if it does not concern you--or you think you are immune, you--and I say this because I care--
are a fool. Lets look at a short history of the 911truth Movement and ancillary disruption.
Welcome to the AstroTurf-dome.There's a surprisingly fair wikipedia article about the 911 truth movement, no doubt due to the work of many diligent activists:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_Truth_movementHere's a relevant bit:
Communication
The internet plays a large role both in the communication between adherents and between local groups of the 9/11 Truth movement and in the dissemination of the views of the movement to the public at large.
The Internet--correct or not--is seen as the main news media of 911truth. And now you can see why some people get attacked and harassed online and others don't. The MSM has been sorted long ago--it's controlled. 19 Arabs did it--that's all you'll hear form them. But the Internet is a different kettle of fish. Since it can't be controlled, it has to be co opted. And it has to be done in a way that looks grass roots. Mix the message with complete shite--"The Jews", Space beams, the Holocaust- they kill two birds with one stone:
1: turn off the casual reader who might have gotten involved by deeply offending them, and
2: from those left who object the loudest you know which trouble makers to target
After all, they have so trustingly joined the main websites or yahoo groups and now know exactly where people are. Need to know more? Send a friendly face to engage them--IRL. Do this again and again until they have a data base of "trouble makers" to "deal with".
What?
How the fook do you think they got the goods on people? Black magic? Most of the first and oldest "Truth" sites are little more than honeypots run by the naive and or incompetent. Many were spin offs of the election fraud "movement". I put that in quotes because as far as I can see, the "leaders" of the election fraud movement did bugger all to stop actual election fraud.
Are they all incompetent? And is it just chance many of them have been caught working with people now known to be disruptors?
Here's some shining moments in 911truth leadership:
Kyle Hence--just making shite up about him and hoping it'll stick:
http://wq2rx.blogspot.com/2007/10/banned-screaming-and-incoherent-kyle.html
(Sorry--no live link--I will not bleed rank for these people)
Ellen Mariani-whose husband helped plan the attacks--so some people say:
http://www.nypost.com/seven/07162007/news/columnists/9_11_skeptics_lunatic_fringe_columnists_andrea_peyser.htm
Edna Cintron--tasteless digging into a victim's past:
http://progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=printer_friendly&forum=218&topic_id=4684
Gary Welz--apparently was working with the 9/11 attackers:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azURaXAe2mY
Val McClatchey--accused of faking her photo for profit:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06218/711239-85.stm
Sandra Bradshaw--isn't real or didn't really die--according to some picking apart her photos and personal information:
forum.911movement.org/index.php?showtopic=6172&st=15
(another place I will not bleed rank for)
An obvious--and admitted--cyberstalking operation to find "who's behind 911blogger, etc, etc:
911closeup.com/nico/911blogger_jones.html
(will not bleed rank)
And we all know Mark Humphrey was the Harley Guy(that is sarcasm):
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/2009/05/mark-humphrey-is-not-harley-guy.html
What does this have to do with 911 leadership, you might ask? That's the bloody point.
What the fuck were these "leaders" doing while a continuous and ongoing campaign to harass victims and activists was going on--for years- under their noses?Here's a list of "leaders":
http://www.911blogger.com/node/20750If these are leaders, god help us. Mr. Stahl is quite a fan of Killtown. I hear he was rather gun ho about Mark Humphrey being harassed as the Harley guy. Carol Brouillet will always hold a place of infamy for supporting anti semite Captain May. She followed that act up by endorsing Kevin Barrett--after he was arrested for domestic abuse. Jon Gold is one of the few people I respect on that list.
I can hear the whineing already--and shut it. Just shut it. If you useless wastes of space (you know who you are)who want to be called leaders can find the time the spread lies by Internet stalkers, interview Holocaust "investigators", endorse drunks and criminals for public office,
then you can bloody well find the time to take notice of, stand up and speak out against the problems in your own ranks.Don't say they didn't know. Thanks to the spam lists and a legion of astro turf yahoo groups
everyone --particularly the "leaders"--knew what was happening when it happened.
An example of a nice respectable yahoo group--blooming with astro truf:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WETHEPEOPLE_UNITEDSound nice eh? All warm and fuzzy? In 2003 they sounded reasonable(from forwarded links):
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WETHEPEOPLE_UNITED/message/3452
Dear Hearts, I'm not an American, so I cannot assist these good people.
All I
can do is forward their appeal to as many people as possible, and hope
that
some of you will choose to take action. Thank You. From Gaele...
----- Original Message -----
From: Human Rights Action Center Alert List
<alerts@...>
To: <galmai@...>
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 9:13 AM
Subject: Take Action: Help Torture Survivors
So when did they pick up Ozzybinoswald?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WETHEPEOPLE_UNITED/message/97700Or why, in this post, is "Skinny" plugging Nico's material?:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WETHEPEOPLE_UNITED/message/136907nico's porn reviews ep.2: Webfairy in Bed with AQ Al-Qyeda
nico's porn reviews ep.2: Webfairy in Bed with AQ Al-Qyeda
nico's porn reviews ep.2: "Webfairy in Bed with AQ Al-Qyeda" nico's porn
reviews Pt.2 feat. TheWebfairy, AQ Al- nico's porn reviews ep.2: "Webfairy in
Bed with AQ Al-Qyeda"
nico's porn reviews Pt.2
feat. TheWebfairy, AQ Al-Qyeda,
PeggyCarter, Ryanary Economicx,
paulagloria and MNNdroppedtheballson911.
greetings from Warren Cuccurollo,
to be guest on PaulaGloria (Fri 05/02) ;
And you can't ask anyone anything--apparently the owners and mods are even hidden from the membership--a membership of 1,116.
Val McClatchey was mentioned in this 2004 post--before the harassment started(I think):
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WETHEPEOPLE_UNITED/message/23821Killtown is still used as a credible reference:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WETHEPEOPLE_UNITED/message/164855To be fair--technically it's not a
911 yahoo group--but most of the 911 yahoo groups spun off of similar groups. Maybe I'm reading more into this case--maybe they're so clueless and out of touch they just don't notice. If that's the case, then they are still a menace because others have noticed and are taking advantage of the network they provide. In short it's a bloody mess. And some people think it's a grand idea to welcome people into this shite without a warning or game plan? And the petitions--have a good read now--there seeded with loads of names that have since proven to be untrustworthy.
It didn't start out that way. Or did it? It looks like mostly not--from the rank and file perspective:
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2002/09/14/1486451.php?Face it--most of us have been bamboozled by astro truf from the beginning. Sites acted--or were coopted to act-- like honeypots. Trends were analyized. Management of 911 truth online was enforced by a combination of friendly cajoling, information management and implied --and sometimes outright--threats.
In normal activist movements, this is the point the lawyers would step in and lend a helping hand. And where the fook have they been? Banding together to make this site apparently:
http://www.lawyersfor911truth.blogspot.comAnd that's grand and all, using their legal acumen to advance 911 activism. But know what lawyers in real activist movements also do? T
hey volunteer their services for either members or people who might be allies. Or at least not enemies.
You know, like Ellen Mariani. Maybe if she had a real lawyer--not a Larouche goon--she'd have been saved some time and money. Or--Val McClatchey--can't look too good having a supposed "truther" attacking a 911 witness for
years.This can't all be news to them. Have they volunteered to help any of these people? If so, I haven't heard it. But I have heard of some slimy lawyers whose job it is to advise harassers on what they can get away with...
What does this have to do with Craig Ranke and CIT? Well, it's the same bollox, now innit? It's just the latest in a long line of harassment attempts against victims, witnesses and activists--except now some people have gotten cause and effect confused. Make no mistake--by publishing--and attempting to justify the Face to Name thread in the CIT response section:
z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showforum=9and republishing other material about people obtained from internet stalkers--Craig Ranke takes himself out of the company of any kind of truther.
Ranke shows himself to be the latest version of the wq2rx-style internet stalking campaign against any independent online truther who goes "off message".And that's where we stand today. Ranke has no one to blame but himself.
No theory ever hurt anyone. Criticizing a theory never hurt anyone. Going after people--
the parts of their lives they have not volunteered and in no way are connected to their activism--that hurts people. It's an intimidation tactic. Even when it doesn't work, it makes new people hesitant to join--
especially is a blisteringly idiotic and incompetent leadership is just letting it happen with no comment. Or saying attempting to hold the parties responsible--legally--is bad...
"Oh I don't mind" many people say. Bully for them. They're the few and bloody minded with thick skins. But most people aren't. And why should they be? They shouldn't have to "not mind". The "leadership" should be setting a standard for accountability which does not include telling people to ignore it and it will go away. Or waving their virtual fingers. Stop it, right now. Yeh, that's going to work.
What works is force. Always has, always will. Confrontation, a clear explanation of what exactly is wrong, and a clear method and means of sorting it. Followed by the political and/or financial will to make it happen along with the appropriate cautions.
If this makes you feel uncomfortable then maybe you want to take up making cookies or something. Because if we're hesitant to hold nasty people trying to intimidate us responsible
in perfectly legal ways when we have the right to--
how the fuck do you expect to hold an ex administration of war criminals accountable for mass murder on 9/11? The irony is--regarding CIT--of the people at Truthaction--I was one who tried to get along with Mr. Ranke. Specifically I repeated my attempt to "agree to disagree", in spite of his insistence to "debate":
http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=20000#20000Remember his "reasons" for asking people to "expose" his "enemies",
is that he has vital information that should not be suppressed. He can make a twisted argument for many people in that thread who've debated him,
but there is none for Jenny. I never debated him about his evidence--one way or the other. I have said his behavior could be improved:
http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=20000#20000So his vital evidence is not the reason Craig is doing what he's doing.
He's doing it because he's a stalker, not a truther. I wouldn't even be blogging about him anymore, if it wasn't because of the face-to-the-name thread and his unwise "retaliation".
That is classic Fetzer/Webfairy/Killtown/wq2rx stalker behavior, and Ranke will not get away with it.What Mr. Ranke is risking--(for himself and the company's whose phone number he's using as CIT's contact) by publishing people's information, with or without their consent,
but in the context of "enemies" to be "exposed"-- being liable for:
Internet stalking
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberstalkinghttp://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyber_stalkingand any actions inspired by Ranke's "hit list":
Sometimes a stalker may go on to hurt that person's body by assault
Identity theft and fraud:
http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/fraud/websites/idtheft.html(note the advice given that flies in the face of some 911 "leaders":
Be
stingy about giving out your personal information to others)
And since a business entity is involved , the better business bureau may be a place to start if neither Mr. Ranke nor Inspiriant are responsive to complaints:
http://www.bbb.org/This has nothing to do with 911 truth or CIT's theories--this is solely about using their forum as the latest harassment platform. I will cheerful stop blogging about them if the "Face to the Name" thread is removed along with anyone else person information CIT has no permission to publish. And CIT-- from this point forth --refrains from any further stalking behavior. Believe it or not, there are loads of things I'd rather be doing.
But I will not watch people attacked IRL and not give them the means to take care of themselves when I can.
_________________________________
There's been a parting of the ways between me and some people. I respect them, I care about them and--maybe contrary to things said in private out of frustration--
I will let nothing bad happen to them. So Mr. Ranke --and others like him--
should not make the mistake these people are not protected. But many of them are still under the spell that an ultra rational approach will win the day.
Look around you. That's obviously not true. Appealing to pure logic and reason only work in a reasonable environment. Debating evidence until you're blue in the face will not gain more ground--though admittedly it will prevent one from loosing ground. The problem isn't reason or facts. The problem is activist infrastructure, so to speak. Looking at activism just in terms of theories with no effective means for people to receive those theories is like arguing which auto has the best fuel efficiency while the roads and bridges are in disrepair: you may be right, but you're going nowhere with it. In activism people--and their good will--make up most of our "infrastructure".
Fucks sake, most people out there know something was dodgy about how the administration handled the September 11th attacks. They're not stupid--the MSM just makes it look that way. A war with no end in sight, and economy gone to hell Stateside and make no mistake that did start on Sept 11th 2001. Logic and reason by themselves never fixed anything. Political will is what makes changes--the political will of a focused non compromised leadership and the will of ordinary people once they see cause and effect and where the problem lies.
IMHO the leadership of the "911truth movement" was compromised from day one. I don't care what you call it--incompetence, malice, stupidity, naivety--but the direct result is a dwindling base and negligible political will. And because that is the dominant tone, anyone new brought into the meat grinder without an understanding of the risks, will be more cannon fodder--especially if they build an online presence.
Not to warn people of this reality is--simplly put, irresponsible.People are what count. No one was hurt by a theory--no, not even the no planes theories. It was the nastiness of the people pushing them at the time that was damaging. It was looking the other way while the nastiness was happening that was damaging. It was telling people "ignore them and they will go away" that was damaging. It was trying to manipulate people into being public that was damaging. People--people are what count. Take care of people or there will be no 911 truth movement. Jon Gold understood this--and he has been taking shite for it on all sides ever since.
There are many suggestions out their for 911 activism. But they mostly focus on what to say or talk about. Here's mine --that I'll elaborate on later:
1: Decide how involved you're ready to be--online, IRL, both.
2: Tell no one anything more than you're comfortable with. If they push--mark that as a flag.
3: When discussing with the public, lead with the best evidence. Be polite and civil when possible.
4: Leave out the bollox--the holocaust, the moon hoax, anything else that is a distraction and obviously nutty. Save your speculations for conversations with close friends
5:If you are targeted for harassment/slander because of your involvement in 911 truth--take notes and archive all evidence. DO NOT confront attackers on their a forum. Simply registering you give them more information. If the site is sympathetic to the harassers, avoid confronting even the webmaster until you have talked to a lawyer or other resources:
http://www.cyberbullying.us/http://www.privacyrights.org/6:Remember the survivors and witnesses are our best resource. Do not hesitate to protect them.
7: Don't start a fight, but if someone starts one--finish it.
PS--to a certain three wee lurkers working together--don't forget to work CRAZY into you're commentary. No matter it hasn't worked for 2 solid years--you might get lucky. ;-)
--if one doesn't bother to hunt up their domain:
