"Dear asshole..." (Harassment over DC Madam articles/book)

Ed.--I've gotten some harassing comments on here over the last couple of weeks over the book and articles on this blog that are related to the DC Madam case. Apparently, I'm doing something right (or write) here. This was attempted four years ago in the same manner: a fake attempt to give the impression of a "cease and desist" notice, which cannot be done in any binding sense by posting it as a comment. In fact, you cannot currently serve someone in any way that's binding this way. It will not be acknowledged by a court of law in the United States.

Unless you also serve someone with hard copy papers in person, or through the mail, it's not going to stick, yo, so step off, bitch. This all has to be done through the legal system. Sending fake threatening comments doesn't do this, it's acting outside of it to affect the same results without revealing one's identity. This tells me they do know a little about the law, at least, maybe more than they're letting on. None of this has occurred here--there has been no serving--and that's why none of this is worth an ounce of sweat. This is one more laughable, pathetic attempt to get someone to take down information about someone else by taking down the entire blog, and that wouldn't hold up in court either, all a sorry bluff. You have to specify what lines, what statements, in an article, essay, book, etc., were libelous or slanderous, and establishing that either occurred is very difficult in American jurisprudence. I know this because I've taken paralegal courses, but really, any drooling asshole should know this. I can assure you that even repeat offenders do.

Here's what the goober wrote first, and granted that they might be from Texas since they can't spell of do addition:

 I look forward to fourth coming litigation, marathon deposition sessions of every blogger that had made a post regarding Jack Burkman and the loves of his life! Win,Lose it doesn't matter! Its going to be very expensive for all parties involved! Or, you can shut this site down as soon as possible!

Dennis G. Brewer Sr. And Associates, P.C.

Tuesday, March 13, 2012 12:27:00 AM EDT 

Whoever they are, they got pissed and created a fake Google profile shortly after reading something on this blog, the wimp. This is so I don't who they are related to the case, or simply to avoid me suing their asses off for criminal harassment, which I would, and will, if I discover their sorry identity. "Forthcoming" is one word, stupid.

"I look forward to"--look forward to kissing my ass, fuck you very much. You're this law firm in Irving, Texas? Bullshit you are. Either way, you've made a serious error if I discover who you are, so keep your pointed head down. Also, you write like a spastic dork. Like? Asshole went on FOUR days later: "Matt Janovic: you fucking coward! I gave you a week to pull this site down. You are going to wish you took me seriously! Hope you have money to burn!" Right, use someone's identity, then a fake one that hides your actual identity, good move there, not obvious at all. Idiot. Clown.

I responded on March 22nd (multiple ones, I've bunched them):

Hey Dennis, where have you been, asshole? This shit has been up for over two years, shithead. You have to SERVE ME, asshole, email AND snail mail, US Post. A little law school 101, fucker. Who are you, really? This has been up for years. This is all alleged, and I have a RIGHT under the First Amendment to my opinions, asshole. ... "Dhar," who's the coward? Tell me and everyone your REAL FUCKING NAME, ASSHOLE. YOU are the coward. Blow me, fuckface.

They tried to make it seem like they wanted something specific taken down by mentioning Burkman. Could it be Mark Capansky? Possibly, maybe.

Finally, I had to kick them in their hollow head one last time, yesterday:

PS to the tard: Not only can't you spell ("fourth") you're unable to do simple mathematics: "I gave you a week to pull this site down." You posted your first harassing comment on March 13th, then followed up with the one that contained the above quote on the 17th--four days, asshole.

Are you even a real person or a Defense Dept. AI bot? Either way, you're a lying idiot and a fool to think that an anonymous threat (harassment) is going to make me pull anything, fuck you very much. … If you serve me, I GET TO KNOW WHO YOU ARE. Threats coming from the shadows are admissible in court unless it's me suing your ass off for harassment.

Ever heard of "prior restraint"? I have ever right to publish my book and to keep these posts up because they're my opinions, asshole.

Cowards throw around fake threats from the shadows, I post my real name at all times online with a few exceptions. Guess what? There's nothing you can do about any of this. In my opinion, most of these women who have contacted me are TELLING THE TRUTH.

"Dahr"(the sound retards make when they do the chicken-wing motion) has grown silent after all of this. I'd hide my identity too if I made as much of an ass of myself as they have. 

What I believe is at play here is that someone wants to remove primary materials I've posted on the case--this includes anything about Mr. Burkman--maybe to be able to say down the road, maybe even in court, "these materials in the book have never been published," when the emails, comments, and everything else related to the DC Madam case have been online for years without any real complaints coming from anyone identifying themselves through the legal system--not that anyone would be able to under the law, this speech is protected, I can and have successfully published, finito. None of it violates anyone's rights, nor any agreements. That aside, Palfrey is dead, estate aside. That part of the narrative is closed. Who's next? Bring it on, bitch.

Gimp of the perverse: The loves of Jack Burkman, Part I

Postscript: DUCK YOU SUCKER... 

Postscript, 3-27-2012: You have to love my typos in the original responses. The good side is that you can at least tell I can spell the words properly. "Fourth coming." Sam Eardth II? Is English their first language? Man,  I sure hope so for their--our--sake (not rice wine). I rest my case, your honor...

A healthy reminder: David Corn's 9/11 truth article from March 2002 and some personal observations

WWW--This is an oldie but a goodie and is still sadly relevant. Corn had this op ed out in the March 2002 issue of the Nation, the publication he still edits from Washington.

Corn wrote presciently at the time:

There are always national security misdeeds to be mad about. They may not be as cinematic in nature as a plot in which shady, unidentified U.S. officials scheme to blow up the World Trade Towers to gain control of an oil pipeline in Central Asia. But dozens of dead Hondurans or twenty or so Afghans wrongly killed ought to provoke anger and protest. In fact, out-there conspiracy theorizing serves the interests of the powers-that-be by making their real transgressions seem tame in comparison. (What's a few dead in Central America, compared to thousands in New York City? Why worry about Negroponte, when unidentified U.S. officials are slaughtering American civilians to trigger war?)

Perhaps there's a Pentagon or CIA office that churns out this material. Its mission: distract people from the real wrongdoing. Now there's a conspiracy theory worth exploring. Doesn't it make sense? Doesn't it all fit together? I challenge anyone to disprove it. ("When 9/11 conspiracy theories go bad," The Nation, 03.02.2002)

Good luck proving him wrong! You know, I had a kind of lame experience during the DC Madam scandal with Corn, but I don't fault him these days (at the time, it was quite the opposite). He asked me about the presence of Ronald Roughead in the late madam's records and why it was relevant. He was skeptical, and that's fine, as he should have been. I remarked that it was relevant since Roughead was violating the terms of his security clearance at the time he made the calls in late 2005. Such an activity is forbidden. Corn never replied back. Palfrey had hooked-me-up with him, lamely, and without any good context. She would continue to do such things as time bore on.

A ll that said, he wasn't willing to move forward on it, and who can blame him when you look at Palfrey's behavior during all of that saga towards the press? She jerked everyone around and tried to use jornalists and bloggers to do the investigating for her, to exonerate her. That's fine, but you don't send people down blind alleys, you have something relevant to tell them. That's not to excuse their laziness and jadedness in the mainstream media, but Corn, as an editor, had to prioritize where to put his limited resources to investigate a story. The Nation--in case you didn't notice--isn't made of money. Yes, he'd found Roughead in the phone records but probably knew he and his staff could investigate the whole mess for years without that many real breakthroughs, and besides, people like me can grind away at finding the primary historical documents that they and others can examine in the aftermath (or vice versa). Surely, he had to know that Roughead was the brother of CNO Gary Roughead! No, it wasn't simply about "big names," there were other issues at play.

What do I think the significance of SAIC's Ronald Roughead was, his being in the DC Madam's phone records, a former Defense Attache, former director of the Iraqi Media Network, an investigator at the Kenya Embassy bombing, and likely an employee of defense/intelligence contractor SAIC? I can't draw any final conclusions, but it's pointing towards illegal lobbying practices, not that he would be a final indicator or it. His very presence is the answer. Corn hasn't had access to the defense materials I and others have, but he surely knew that it would practically take a congressional inquiry to get to the bottom of what appeared to be evidence of corruption beyond the mere issues of government and elected officials frequenting hookers.

In short, he asked me the wrong question, but not out of malice or apathy when he mistakenly focused on one man. The patterns are what count in this story, but again, he hasn't seen everything I have. A lot of people have dismissed this 2002 article as being jaded, but it's not, he's right. People have been wasting an incredible amount of time and energy chasing ghosts. I have done my share of this, but that's part of these times and part of investigating events like the DC Madam story where there have been a number of blind alleys. Even the House Judiciary Committee was interested in investigating whether Palfrey's 6th Amendment rights were being violated during the proceedings; but as happened again and again, they got cold-feet and gave no answers as to why.

It's almost hopelessly complicated and obscured, but there were a few peeks behind the curtain that were more than tantalizing and even a little revealing, about how business is done in Washington D.C. But a conspiracy? All I saw was incredible incompetence from the prosecution and the Court, and even from the investigators that likely created the whole mess to begin with.

"When 9/11 conspiracy theories go bad," The Nation, 03.02.2002http://www.alternet.org/story/12536

Alex Constantine, where art thou?

WWW--Over a year ago, the other paranoid Alex threatened to sue me, and right after he had a near-miss with a civil suit of his own! After making some rather pointed remarks on one of his comments threads (moderated by himself, so he cannot complain, he let it pass) about the nature of Jeane's death (she was NOT murdered, wake up), he got pissed-off when I wrote that he was making these wild claims along with others to get attention and basically make money, sell merch, ad space, whatever.

That's my opinion and I have a right to it, but he didn't think so, so he went and wrote a 3-part, 2-part piece (ask him) about me that was rife with speculation and just more wild allegations and flat-out untruths. At least he finally noticed Jeffrey A. Taylor when he came to my site and read my Palfrey material, and he dutifully regurgitated it as I assume the rest of his ilk does. Then, dumbbells can go, "Look, see? He wrote against this like the lefty-guys!" when it's really just about more grist for his mill and his anti-government agenda, a right-wing agenda.

It should be said and written again and again: government isn't the problem, it's the people that get voted in--mostly by the right--who are the problem, they are corrupt. It's like blaming the hammer instead of the guy who hit you in the head with it, it's a moronic and dysfunctional argument that Jones, Constantine, Nimmo, Rense, and all the rest make, and too many on the so-called "progressive left" are buying into it because these nimrods simply know the right things to say to sway them.

Remember: genuine democracy is contentious, it is dirty and messy and ugly. People argue in a democracy. It can even get ugly. Never, ever, should it become violent when we disagree, not ever. But argue? We should be taking the gloves off all the time when it comes to our beliefs. You cannot be inert or neutral in any society, that's a myth, and I consider my writing a humble contribution to the dialog. Constantine and these parapoliticians, on the other hand, are trying very desperately to undermine our government.

We might ask them why, in seriousness, this is so, and why they don't suggest real reform and participation in the political process to fix things. It's my feeling that many of them are there to demoralize the left, the majority of Americans when it comes to issues of the role of government and social policy. I have no respect for these people and consider them wackos at best, provocateurs at worst. Government will always be the solution, and it's up to us to make it serve the public. To do nothing is just more self-fulfilled prophecy, more bullshit, like what these turds are selling in the form of t-shirts, books, and coffee mugs. It's a cottage industry.

Official: Romanov Princess Anastasia and Prince Alexander were slaughtered by Bolshevik forces in 1918

Russia--It's a lieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!! She's in Atlantis with Bigfoot, D.B. Cooper, and all those missing planes and ships from the (fictional) Bermuda Triangle! Lieeeeeeeeeeeessssss!!!!!!

Well, at least something along those lines. Hey, it sold books for decades, what with dumbells speculating for dumbells what had happened to the Prince Alexander and Princess Anastasia. Armies of crazy old Slavic ladies claimed that they too were Anastasia, and even a few faceless cranks claimed they were Alexander. All of it was a lie, a body of completely worthless literature.

Nobody should have cared. The only thing that matters now is what really happened, and now we know: all of the Romanovs were killed by the Ural Soviet under orders of Lenin and the Central Committee in the month of July, 1918.

Of course they were going to slaughter all of them. That was the M.O. of the Bolsheviks, beginning with the deposed Tsar's family. Like the "Night of Long Knives" for the Nazis, this was what kicked-off the slaughter that was to come, the crossing of a threshold. Nothing could be the same after the Ural Soviet's deed, under orders from the Central Committee under V.I. Lenin.

Lenin directly ordered the murders of the Romanovs, and it was hidden until around the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. One of the first publications to note Lenin's orders (in memo form) was in Lenin: A New Biography (1994, first published in Russia years earlier) a book by the late Major General Dmitri Volkogonov that details most of the known machinations at the time it was written. Volkogonov had unparalleled access to the Party archives during the last years of the Cold War and was finally able to release his discoveries during Glasnost and the final fall of the Soviet regime.

The Truth (I think this is the original article on the findings by U.S. Military pathologists): http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0004838

The last word on the "9/11 Truth Movement"

WWW--I'd say these folks are stupider than the Republicans, but many of them either once were or are to-the-right of the self-destructing national party. What came into your minds that the Bush II administration were anything but corrupt and incompetent, the two being interchangeable?

Listen: are you stupid? Don't answer, we already know you all are. There's a mountain of empirical evidence to disprove any number of your stupid and paranoiac Sunday-go-to-meetin' speculations, you morons. Grow-up, wake up, and realize how incredibly foolish and silly you appear to the entire world (except a lot of the French who are also over-credulous about 9/11 conspiracies for nationalist reasons).

What's really interesting is the obvious arch-conservative theme in the notion that 9/11 was an "inside job." Your proof? How about going after something that's provable? Right, that would actually require effort, a well reasoned argument, and evidence and accountability for the accusers. Had there been any of this, we'd know about it, and everywhere, its dissemination would be unstoppable just by the sheer force of word of mouth. But it hasn't, and it won't. Why?

Because if you hadn't noticed over the last eight years, the Bush II administration wasn't capable of doing nearly anything right, not even cover-ups, not even firing nine U/S. Attorneys, and so on. I could literally go on for days about what they were incompetent at, it's staggering in its scope. So staggering, it seems, that when you're as paranoid as some people, you miss the elephant in the room that's standing on your toe.

Advice: stop clutching your intellectual cop-out and get serious.


Postscript, 02.20.2009: With all of the obvious elephants in the room (the U.S. Attorney firing scandal, illegal wars of aggression in Afghanistan and Iraq, a runaway corporate crime spree that could only have happened through indolence and willful inaction, bribery, the outing of a CIA officer's identity, billions missing in Iraq rebuilding funds, stolen national elections, illegal warrantless surveillance, torture and rendition, cronyism and open corruption, ad infinitum), a 9/11 Truth Movement" only serves the purpose of wasting time, money, and energy that would be best spent of real issues and causes.

I would wager many of these wags would love to have a Big Brother telling them what to do.

From the perspective of some of them, it sure beats having to take a part of the responsibility for some of this mess instead of mounting real investigations and hearings that would accomplish something. I'm sure that if the Pentagon and State Department didn't have them around, they'd have invented these groups to serve the same function. These folks are (barely) closeted authoritarians. Nothing succeeds like failure. Pathetic. Cowardly. Foolhardy.

Alex Jones makes coffee (A satire?)

It was one of those Pleasant Valley Sundays: He awoke to the sound of his motion detection sensors--all of them were going off. What could it be? More precisely: who could it be, and why were they coming for him, especially on Sunday?

He knew why, he had no illusions--only certainty--and the wimmen folks eat that shit up, jack, even when one is clearly wrong. He was used to being wrong, sure, but he never told anyone and never displayed it openly. This was part of his key to success. Since he was surrounded by paranoiacs, he wore his fear on his sleeve...like a swastika. OK, in fact it was a swastika. Like everyone, he had his own secrets, buried deep in a closet. What were they?

The fact that he had a small penis--hey, nothing doing pal! That off-camera Bohemian Grove incident still stung him like the clap, it was all some Fifth columnist plot that he'd hatched on himself, so he scratched himself and shivered, nearly gagging. This was a momentous moment every morning, like mounting D-Day. Yes, it was time to get out of bed. It could become problematic: there were unnamed legions of conspiracies working against him at every moment, even while he slept...especially when he slept. He used to cover all of his windows with blinds but he started suffering from Vitamin D deprivation so they had to go.

He itched all over. It must have been something that was purposefully slipped into his eczema cream by a faceless cabal of geriatrics, this was certain, he knew it, he knew it, he goddamned well knew it. What was he thinking about earlier? This modern life was too much for him, which is why he needed someone--anyone--to blame for his inadequacies, especially nameless, faceless ones who could never be identified, who could never talk or fight back. Jews weren't going to cut it anymore, and besides, they tend to give as good as they get. No, one can never have enough fictional enemies, it's true, he decided, patting himself on the back so hard he sprained his fat, flaccid American wrist.

Oh yeah, he remembered what came next: coffee. Shit. He trembled violently. This would mean walking across the room into the line-of-sight of Black Ops snipers. The blinds were gone now. One time he tried leasing a room in the highest building in Texas but saw a Black helicopter hovering outside of a window as the suspicious realtor showed him the apartment. She was clearly a operative working for Mossad, but he needed a new place so she'd have to do.

Instead, she found him a unit that was less elevated in (and than) Austin. He could see the tower that Charles Whitman shot dozens from where he was at, finally shrugging off the erection he get at the thought of that 1966 incident. He had no questions in his mind--Whitman was a victim of MKULTRA mind control experiments, and so was he. There was nowhere to run--he knew this--and accepted that when it was his time...you know. He'd tuck his head between his legs and run like a pussy, c'mon people.

Over an hour had now elapsed since his first thought of coffee, and now he had to urinate badly. This presented other problems and conundrums. There were other windows open to the line-of-sight of other NWO snipers. How would he get to the bathroom? He had a plan...

He covered himself in an Army blanket but then worried that it might be tainted with smallpox, so he dropped it and started crawling on the floor below the windows. He was clever and wouldn't allow these forces arrayed against him to alter his life one bit, and they hadn't, no way, not even close. He'd always been like this, a paranoid. As a child, he was certain that the Boogeyman was coming to get him and had been through this drill before, he was a proactive kind of a guy. Coffee. Boogeyman. Crap. That was it: he'd have to call one of his assistants to come over, so he made a call, collect. There was no answer, dammit. Oh boy, oh Jesus Christ.

The time had come to be a man: he would walk upright into the kitchen and make a cup of coffee. This would mean putting his life on the line for millions who didn't even know his name, but he would make the sacrifice. He put one foot in front of the other, moving forward with great reluctance and spine-tingling fear. The kitchen grew nearer and his fear reached a fever pitch. He was quaking, but he had it under control and grabbed one of the NWO mugs he sold in the thousands on his website, grabbed the Guatemalan coffee from the freezer and was about to pour it into the filter when he realized he'd forgotten something crucial: the toxicology kit.

Great, now he'd have to run to the cupboard across the kitchen. He did, then got the coffee started. After twenty minutes it was ready. He felt something warm...he'd wet himself. Not again. Oh well, there would have to be another cover-up with the fans, but that was no-problemo, they'd swallow anything, even what was now running down his leg. By this point he couldn't control his laughing and abruptly stopped as he raised the cup of coffee to his mouth--he'd almost forgotten the toxicology test, how careless. It would take a few days for the results to come in, but he could stand the wait. It would be worth that good cup-o'-Joe...

Conspiracy LLC.™

WWW--This is likely to be the last thing I'm going to write about this species of bottom feeder (no, not Bill Bastone, another fish-to-fowl). The vast majority of these people who write on so-called "conspiracies" tend to be completely off--not just in their contentions, but in their minds. Many of them and their readers are--flatly-put--mentally ill individuals who are so messed-up that they created a new religion.

Their writings will never accomplish much of anything substantial, except diverting people's attention from what really needs to be done to change things. They will never spawn a real or constructive political movement with any real results. What they accomplish is to demoralize people, making genuine social and political problems into a mythology of hopelessness and demoralization. Some of them are definitely on the payroll of the FBI, the CIA, and other aspects of the intelligence community, either as assets or as operatives, just as some journalists are.

That they're pathetic is a given. LavaCocktail's Jay Beldo summed it best for me today: "Conspiracy itself has become a bottom line commodity no different than I-Pods or Nike tennis shoes, sold by various fear/profit mongers." Yes, the primary motive here is sales, primarily of books, but also mugs, t-shirts, DVDs, CDs, and other worthless collectibles for the desperate. How is this any different from fundamentalist Christian hucksters? It isn't. I like Jay, he gets it. He understands we have to keep our minds positive and clear, and we have our own paths to take. I recommend his website highly.

Sure, Alex Constantine will probably try to bait me on this again, but rest assured that he and others have got their work cut-out for them. There was no defamation on my part, I wasn't the one who yelled "liar" over and over again on my site. My right to the opinion that Constantine and his ilk are pricks, bastards, assholes, morons, and scum, is secure in the First amendement. It's also my opinion that these arch-conservative turds have very little respect for the right to free speech, unless it applies to them. The Bolsheviks and German National Socialists held the same attitudes.

Jackass of the Month: DC Madam's Former Condo Manager, Joe Strizack

Orlando, Florida--No, it's not Alex Jones, but the same kind of vulture. Proving that the parapolitical is a great way to get attention (and dollars), Joe Strizack is making-the-rounds of everyone with a working-microphone, lunch, and some cab money, telling us that Jeane Palfrey was "afraid for her life."

This is untrue, and it's unlikely that Strizack met her more than a few times in-person (I never did, our correspondence was via-e-mail, and a few phone calls). It's even doubtful that he talked to her personally.

He's doing what Larry Flynt, Alex Jones (whose show he spoke on), and the rest of the Internet and media are doing: milking a horrible tragedy for as much money and advertising as they can. Mr. Strizack is a liar and a blackguard. Never mind the wild leaps of logic it requires to believe there's a conspiracy in Jeane's death, and forget that the courts already did all of the real work in destroying her--"she was murdered." [Ed. 04.05.2010--Correction, it would be "She were murdered."]

I understand that thinking hurts, and that there is no "bottom" for how low human beings can sink, but there's more to this mad dash towards a conspiracy: most casual-onlookers cannot understand the story, and neither could the mainstream press. Most people cannot think about more than one concept at once. Nothing new here, move along.

Things will die down, and nobody will remember the vapid Strizack or the stupid remarks he has made--lies--about Jeane Palfrey and his very casual association with her. Now, if only we could all forget Larry Flynt, but that's impossible, since he's that untreatable form of the clap. One has to wonder if he's going to bother releasing those other names from her phone records that I trumped hydraulic-man on: John McCain, Dick Cheney, and Fred Thompson.

Conspiracism: what a cottage industry. So much for the truth, but since when did most of humanity ever care about that? You think Rob Capriccioso has jumped on the bandwagon of untruth and wild exaggeration? It's even money. Here's hoping that his blog at least got him laid.