tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35032536855049488972024-03-07T15:39:40.584-08:00Flawed EpiphanyThe blog is devoted to exposing the inconsistencies, evasions, harassment and outright falsehoods propogated by the "Exposing Stephen Ryder, Ivor Edwards, Tom Wescott and the 'Jack The Ripper Casebook' thugs" blog.Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-87271144806062682882009-05-30T01:21:00.000-07:002009-05-30T01:31:11.876-07:00Approaching the AnniversaryIt's been almost 2 years since I've added a post, so I felt I owe an explanation.<br /><br />As part of her ASBO, SSR has effectively had her defamation campaign(s) shut down. She's currently maintaining a blog of NWO conspiracies and religious ranting that is amusing, but irrelevant to this blog.<br /><br />Karen, as you can see from the sidebar, has also been largely behaving herself. In fact she's been quite productive and seems to be directing her energies toward her researches. As I've stated from time to time, I'm not here to comment on her theory of the Ripper case (such as it is), but merely to set the record straight when she starts slandering various other people in the Ripper world. However up until the recent calm the various targets of her attacks have been holding their own quite handily, and the current truce seems to be holding for the moment.<br /><br />All that could change on a dime, of course, but for now I'm content to enjoy the peace and quiet and tend to my orchids, ready to leap into action should the occasion arise.Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-42529892620669166482007-07-03T21:11:00.000-07:002007-07-03T22:22:57.531-07:00And Then There Was One....With all seven of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">SSR's</span> personalities enjoying a well-earned rest at Her Majesty's pleasure (she got six months), her former acolyte has decided it is her turn to step into the limelight.<br /><br />With "<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">SSR</span>" (Felicity Jane <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">Lowde</span>) and Karen's very public falling out and subsequent abandonment of the "<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">Hargoon</span>" blog, Karen lost the shield from behind which she launched the sundry attacks on everyone she felt did not sufficiently recognize her genius. However her months of sullen silence have come to an end as she has launched her own <a href="http://karenkpoulin1.spaces.live.com/">blog</a>.<br /><br />So far the brunt of her righteous wrath has been directed squarely at Bob Hinton, who she claims to be a Freemason and stalker (among many other things). Mr. Hinton is smart enough to defend himself adequately against Ms <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">Trenouth's</span> childish attacks, certainly, but we will continue to point out Karen's contradictions, slanders and outright lies as they occur.<br /><br />The first major howler to appear under Ms <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">Trenouth's</span> byline is the astonishing claim that:<br /><br /><blockquote><p align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;">I would like it known, here and now, that an no time - EVER - has [sic] Felicity Jane <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6">Lowde</span> (<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7">FJL</span>) and I ever been friends, met, talked on the phone, emailed each other, know each other or wrote to each other. I do not like <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8">FJL</span> - she also abused me by making hateful comments on her blog about me. I was just as happy to see that she was imprisoned for her harassment and stalking; however, it was the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9">Ripperologist's</span> collective celebratory reaction that caused me to reinstate my blog. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10">FJL</span> has no connection whatsoever with my blog; and I had no connection with hers. I am just fed up to here of the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11">Ripperologists</span> accusing <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12">FJL</span> and I [sic] of being "bosom buddies", when she lives in England and I live in Canada. Get real, goons!</span></p><span style="color:#000099;"></span></blockquote><br /><br />It's hard to believe that even Karen is foolish enough to believe that anyone will buy this, but apparently she's serious.<br /><br /><strong>Fact</strong>: Karen was "<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_13">SSR</span>"s most fervent (likely her only) supporter and "contributor", with dozens of messages posted on that august forum. Even if we are to be generous enough to accept that Karen never caught on that <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_14">SSR</span> and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_15">FJL</span> were the same person (which would not speak well of her investigative skills), her comment would <em>still</em> be a lie, as Karen posted comments on the the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_16">SSR</span> site <em>that were expressly addressed to <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_17">FJL</span></em>.<br /><br />Here's one from from the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_18">Hargoon</span> blog--keep in mind Karen's claim to have NEVER written to Felicity:<br /><br /><span style="color:#000099;"><blockquote><p><span style="color:#000099;">Hi Felicity,<br /><br />How are you honey? Victim 1 to Victim 2 speaking. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_19">Ripperology</span> is filled with misogynists who do not care, so much, for the female victims of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_20">JTR</span>, they are more preoccupied with <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_21">JTR</span> - Just Their Riches! Or, in Dan's case - Just Their Readership, or <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_22">JTR</span> - Just Their Ratings. You get the picture. </span></p><p></span></p></blockquote><br /><p>No doubt Karen will attempt to side-step this obvious lie in some way. Someone with her knack of re-writing history will likely find a way of erasing this <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_23">embarrassing</span> fact from her mind.<br /></p><br />And to further compound the lie that <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_24">FJL's</span> and Karen's respective blogs have nothing to do with each other, on July 3 Karen posted an entry that is almost entirely dependent on information from the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_25">SSR</span> blog, and contains a lengthy quote from <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_26">SSR</span> (again we note Karen's <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_27">disingenuous</span> use of material written supposedly by someone she dislikes and has had no contact with). However there is a more important issue about this post than Karen's inability to tell <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_28">SSR</span> and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_29">FJL</span> apart, which we will be commenting on <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_30">separately</span>.Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-31094787463199239512007-06-15T12:37:00.000-07:002007-06-15T17:05:50.193-07:00Defeating the Hydra*It is with mixed feelings that we announce that all 7 of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">SSR's</span> personalities (occupying the body of one Felicity <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">Lowde</span>) are currently behind bars awaiting sentence after being convicted of harassment last month. It's quite a story, and we don't have room for the entire thrilling tale, but we present you with the encapsulated version.<br /><br /><ul><li>After a lengthy campaign of slander and harassment conducted on the Internet against a certain Rachel North (among others) which included the adoption of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">FJL's</span> "<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">SSR</span>" persona and the establishment of the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">Hargoon</span> log, Ms North pressed charges against Ms <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">Lowde</span>. This resulted in the arrest of the entire <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6">SSR</span> entity, reflected in the "holiday" announced on the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7">Hargoon</span> log.</li><li><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8">FJL</span> was released on bail, with the condition that she cease communication with or about her victims online. At this point the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9">SSR</span> mask was abandoned and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10">FJL</span> continued her campaign under her own identity on her <a href="http://fjlathome.blogspot.com/">personal blog</a> . Since this was a violation of her bail terms, she was rearrested, had her computer confiscated and was re-bailed with orders not to use the Internet at all. This injunction was broken within hours.</li><li>When the trial date came around, <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11">FJL</span> was what our American friends call a "no-show". She was supposedly suffering from exhaustion, and had arrived at the Court, left a note to that effect and left. The trial went ahead without her and she was found guilty. A warrant was issued for her arrest, and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12">FJL</span> went into hiding to avoid sentencing.</li><li>While in hiding, <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_13">FJL</span> continued to post the standard "<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_14">SSR</span>"-style drivel, most of it directed at Ms North, but alternating with claims of persecution (i.e. her conviction) and vindication (through a new trial). Attacks against <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_15">Ripperologists</span>, her former accomplice Karen <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_16">Trenouth</span>, and a variety of other people continued to appear from time to time.</li><li>Finally after several weeks of living rough on the streets of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_17">Whitechapel</span> (according to her own accounts), <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_18">FJL</span> was spotted at an Internet cafe in Brick Lane. The police were called and the erstwhile fugitive was apprehended. When she appeared in Court, <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_19">FJL</span> was remanded in custody until her late-<span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_20">June</span> sentencing. It has been claimed that during that time <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_21">FJL</span> will undergo a much needed psychiatric evaluation.</li></ul><p>You might be wondering why we didn't expose the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_22">FJL</span>/<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_23">SSR</span> link long ago. While we alluded to it, and personally believed <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_24">FJL</span> and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_25">SSR</span> to be one and the same, we didn't run across <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_26">FJL's</span> personal blog until shortly before <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_27">SSR</span> started their enforced sabbatical. Once we encountered the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_28">former's</span> personal <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_29">webspace</span>--particularly after <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_30">SSR</span>-style ravings started to become the principle editorial content--the similarities were just to blatant to reach any other conclusion.</p><p>During the period when <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_31">FJL's</span> campaign shifted to her own blog, and her case worked it's way through the legal system, we decided to withhold all comment, out of a concern of interfering in a legal matter. We particularly did not wish out efforts to be attributed to Rachel North or other participants in the court case (since we are not connected to them in any way), nor did we wish to validate <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_32">FJL's</span> persecution fantasies. We honestly thought our job was done, but have recently been forced to reconsider for several reasons.</p><p>The first is that, while the author has been neutralized, her method of creating numerous blogs under a variety of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_33">usernames</span> means that her venomous attacks are still out there. </p><p>The second is that a coterie of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_34">FJL's</span> disciples have decided to pick up where their mentor left off. This is particularly true of former <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_35">FJL</span> accomplice/apprentice, now apostate, Karen <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_36">Trenouth</span>.</p><p>The final reason is our admittedly pessimistic opinion that <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_37">FJL's</span> stay at Her Majesty's pleasure will not rehabilitate her in the least. What we have is a respite, nothing more. Once Felicity is again on the loose, we fully expect her escapades to continue.</p><p>Watch this space.</p><p></p><p>*The Hydra was a nasty creature from Greek mythology that had seven heads growing out of a single body. Although not known to maintain a blog, the Hydra did spew poison with every breath.</p>Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-89885826400949976582006-12-13T02:07:00.000-08:002006-12-13T03:06:55.566-08:00New Look, Old Lies<div align="justify">We notice that the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoons</span></span> have created a new blog, returning to it's original name "Shaming Stephen Ryder, Dan <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Norder</span></span>, Tom <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Wescott</span></span> & the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Ripperologist</span></span> thugs". Although there's nothing substantively new on the blog, the fact that they've taken the step of recreating it suggests an intent to revive their campaign of harassment, hypocrisy, and outright lies sometime in the future.</div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Case in point: the most recent (September 14, 2006) <a href="http://exposing-ryder-norder-and-wescott.blogspot.com/2006_09_01_exposing-ryder-norder-and-wescott_archive.html">post</a>.</div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">In this characteristically dishonest attack on Phil Hutchinson (one of the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoon's</span></span> favourite targets), they accuse Philip of gratuitously attacking a Casebook poster with no provocation.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Here's how they describe Philip Hutchinson and his actions :</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"><blockquote><span style="color:#660000;">One of the most vicious libelling thugs, Philip Hutchinson, has instantly started up libelling other authors again, and his acts <span style="font-size:0;">are exposed here (followed by link).</span></span></blockquote></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Here's the post they claim Philip was responding to:</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;"><blockquote><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;">Hello All, The <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Whitechapel</span></span> Society 1888 can confirm a full programme of speakers for 2006. We kick off our new season this Saturday, February 4<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">th</span></span> 2006 at 'The Princess Alice' pub, Commercial St, London E1 at 7.30pm. Our speaker is Stuart Sullivan and his presentation is, 'JACK THE RIPPER: A PSYCHOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION.' Stuart told The <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Whitechapel</span></span> Society, "My research was conducted without any preconceptions and as a result, I believe this suspect, Thomas <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Donoghue</span></span>, is as viable as any who have been suggested as the murderer." Stuart has maintained an interest in the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Whitechapel</span></span> Murders for over 20 years and we look forward this talk with great anticipation. </span><span style="color:#000099;">We hope to see you there!</span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;">Best Wishes,</span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Frogg</span></span> Moody.</span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">WS</span></span>1888</span></div></blockquote></span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;"></span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000000;">To which the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoon's</span></span> <em>claimed </em>that Philip made this response:</span></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;"><blockquote><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;">Ooh goody. My parents read that toilet paper. I'll get them to save it for me. I'll be interested to hear what is said about the Ripper sites; one has a vested interest, you know. Who did they consult, Adrian?</span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;"></span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;">PHILIP</span></div></blockquote></span></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Sounds pretty childish and nasty, right? Philip out of nowhere attacking either Mr Moody--a figure of some esteem in the Ripper community--or the efforts of a well-intentioned researcher whom Mr Hutchinson does not know. We'd call that disgraceful, wouldn't you? Well, if that was <em>really</em> what happened, we'd heartily agree. But of course it wasn't.</div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">The post that Philip was <strong>actually </strong>responding to was from someone else, and it said:</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;"><blockquote><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;">Hi All,The <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_13" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_13" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">WS</span></span>1888 should be mentioned in this Friday's 'Daily Mail' in their 'Question & Answer' section dealing with the Ripper sites.</span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;">ADRIAN.</span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;">(<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_14" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_14" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">WS</span></span>1888 Editor).</span></div></blockquote></span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;"></span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000000;">Suddenly everything changes: Even the dimmest <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_15" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_15" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoon</span></span> can see that the "toilet paper" that Phil was referring to was the Daily Mail (an opinion likely shared by millions of people in England alone). Far from attacking Mr Moody and the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_16" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_16" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">WS</span></span>1888 staff, Philip continues to have a friendly and constructive conversation with Adrian about the Daily Mail article (which he is also kind enough to provide for those reading from outside the UK).</span></div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Unlike the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_17" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_17" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoon's</span></span>, we don't expect you to simply take our word for it. Check out the exchanges <a href="http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?p=40195#post40195">here</a>.</div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Let's be frank, here. This is not a simple mistake, or misinterpretation of events. This is nothing less than a transparently dishonest attempt to smear Philip Hutchinson by manipulating the facts in a shameless way. And they have the nerve to call Philip vicious and libellous? </div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">If the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_18" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_18" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoon's</span></span> are willing to descend to this level <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_19" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_19">intellectual</span></span> honesty and discard allcommon decency in their campaign of harassment, how are we to judge the quality of their Ripper research, when and if it ever appears?</div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">While it seems that "<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_20" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_20" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">SSR</span></span>" is still in hibernation (she has transferred her hate campaign to her personal blog for the time being) it's possible that the "Shaming Stephen Ryder, Dan <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_21" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_21" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Norder</span></span>, Tom <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_22" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_22" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Wescott</span></span> & the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_23" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_23" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Ripperologist</span></span> thugs" may well resume it's noxious efforts again very soon.</div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">And when they do, we'll be here to call them on it.</div>Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-5024307261947543242006-09-17T13:12:00.000-07:002006-09-17T13:47:36.458-07:00Learning from Karen<div align="justify">We notice that the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoon's</span> are back in harness and up to their old tricks. However we noticed that they've adopted one of Karen's favorite techniques--the disappearing post.</div><br />Here's what they posted:<br /><br /><blockquote><span style="color:#000099;">The site has been edited, and dated/irrelevant posts permanently deleted.<br />Mainly to protect the innocent, or people that the thugs that frequent Stephen Ryder's casebook website deceived, who've seen their mistake. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Alot</span> of the thugs we exposed here were blaming innocent people and behaving with their usual thug-malice so we've removed <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">alot</span> of postings.</span></blockquote><p align="justify"><br />On the surface it's a welcome if ungracious admission of what we've been saying all along--that the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoon's</span> have been <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">targeting</span> people for little or no reason, spreading cruel and untrue stories, and generally acting like the bullies that they claim to expose. </p><p align="justify">You'll notice that they don't actually admit they were wrong, they do not apologize to the people they've attacked, nor do they even give any indication who the innocent are. And in true thug fashion they blame everyone (including the victims) except themselves.</p><p>Buried in an earlier comments page, this pseudo-acknowledgement can be found:</p><span style="color:#000099;"><blockquote><span style="color:#000099;">There is no doubt that Bob has been wrongly treated by Karen. We try to be fair to Ryder victims in all their forms. However, he is best advised not to be a bimbo to ripper thugs.</span> </blockquote></span><p align="justify">Overdue, and insufficient, but a start. Note, however, that although they tacitly admit that they wrongfully launched their extensive smear campaign on no other evidence than the insane ravings of Epiphany author Karen <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Trenouth</span>, there is no mention of (let alone apology for) the dozens of slanderous articles about Mr Hinton that have graced the Harpoon's blog. In typical thug fashion, <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">SSR</span> ends the post with a veiled threat directed to Mr Hinton.</p><p align="justify">While it is nice that <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">SSR's</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">meds</span> have taken effect to the extent of acknowledging that their campaign against Bob Hinton and unspecified others was based entirely on the unsupported and often unfounded accusations of an embittered visitor to their site, it would be even nicer if the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoon's</span> were to publicly apologize to those who were attacked on the same, flawed grounds. This includes (but is not limited to):</p><ul><li>Thomas <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Schachner</span></li><li>Maria <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Birchwood</span></li><li>Jana Oliver</li><li>Magpie/Magpie Productions</li><li>Lavender Lady</li><li>How Brown and Tim Mosley</li><li>Jukka Ruskeeahde</li></ul><p align="justify">We call on the author(s) of Jack Rip's Lampoon to step up and do the right thing. They admitted they'd done wrong by editing their blog--now it is time to be open with <em>who</em> they wronged and to make a <em>meaningful</em> apology.</p><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote>Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-86950567813122222922006-08-28T00:57:00.000-07:002007-06-17T00:32:25.216-07:00More of the Same<div align="justify"><span style="color:#333333;">We notice that the Hargoons have changed the name of their blog yet again. But behind their latest facade the desperate truth bending continues unabated.</span></div><br /><div align="justify"><span style="color:#333333;">Their response to yesterday's exposé of their pathetic grasp of both Freemasonry and basic researching skills was hilarious. Here are some highlights, with commentary:</span></div><br /><em><span style="color:#000099;">Our observation vis a vis the Masonic webring and the Intendant of the building, or lodge, earlier outlined, is the correct one. There may be the odd discrepancy but it's irrelevant. We don't build on it, it's an interesting observation.</span></em><br /><em></em><br /><div align="justify"><span style="color:#333333;">The odd discrepancy? They didn't get a <strong>single</strong> fact right! Their observation "vis a vis the Masonic webring" somehow managed to omit the fact that <em>said webring is defunct and has been for years. </em>They took the duties of a person called the Tyler and ascribed them instead to a Masonic degree entitled "Intendent of the Building". They are <strong>now</strong> trying to re-introduce the original howler of the "Intendent of the Lodge" despite having been previously forced to admit that they were wrong about it. </span></div><br /><div align="justify"><span style="color:#333333;">And it can be hardly be "irrelevant" that a group of alleged "researchers" with a particular interest in a Masonic Jack the Ripper Conspiracy have publicly demonstrated that not only do they know nothing about Freemasonry, but lack the slightest ability (or interest) to research the most <em>basic</em> facts about it.</span></div><br /><div align="justify"><em><span style="color:#000099;">We do not care whether this Bob Hinton who is desperate to align himself with Stephen Ryders Jack the Ripper Casebook members ( he has only been a member for six months) is a Modern Mason or a Modern Mormon.</span></em></div><em><span style="color:#000099;"></span></em><p align="justify"><br /><span style="color:#333333;">Really? Then perhaps you can explain why you have posted <strong>twelve</strong> articles referring to Bob Hinton's supposed Masonic connections in the past seven<em><strong> days</strong></em>! That doesn't include the repost that prompted our article and which you have since removed from your blog, presumably out of embarassment.<br /><br /></p></span><div align="justify"><span style="color:#333333;">Perhaps you could also explain why you have created an entirely new blog <em>entirely devoted</em> to Bob Hinton's alleged Masonic connections. It sounds like you care very much. Almost to the point of obsession.</span></div><br /><div align="justify"><span style="color:#333333;">And the funniest part is that Bob Hinton says that he is not a Freemason in the first place, meaning it is more than likely that your efforts <em>are entirely in vain</em>. This is not the 18th century. Freemasons are not required--and seldom do--conceal their membership. Websites, rings, T-shirts, even bumper-stickers proudly proclaim Mason affiliations. Only in the paranoid fantasy world of the Hargoons does the image of a shadowy world of arch-conspirators still hold sway.</span></div><br /><span style="color:#333333;">They also trot out the oft repeated lie:<br /></span><br /><em><span style="color:#000099;">We have no leaning toward any particular theory.</span></em><br /><em></em><br /><span style="color:#333333;">Which we've already blown wide open in an earlier post. But for convenience sake, the Hargoons have exposed the falsehood in the very same paragraph, which says"<br /></span><br /><em><span style="color:#000099;">They daren't discuss the conspiracy theory, because it reveals their ignorance and incompetence. So, they lampoon any freemasonry based observation whatever, as soon as they can, and in so doing, reveal triumphalism, desperation, and ignorance..</span></em><br /><em><span style="color:#000099;"></span></em><br /><span style="color:#333333;">Lest there be any doubt that they are lying through their teeth, the <em>preceding</em> paragraph also reveals their true feelings:<br /></span><br /><em><span style="color:#000099;">We suspect that the 'Ripperologist baboobs' are simply up to their usual stunts, denying any type of conspiracy/Freemason theory as they have neither intelligence, information nor means to approach it.</span></em><br /><br /><span style="color:#333333;">Doesn't sound like they have a bias at all, does it?<br /><br />One of their "anonymous" commentators added their two cents' worth (we hope she got change):</span><span style="color:#000099;"><span style="color:#000099;"><span style="color:#000099;"><span style="color:#000099;"> <blockquote><span style="color:#000099;"><span style="color:#000099;"><span style="color:#000099;"><span style="color:#000099;">Yes, why is Bob going to all these lengths to deny his Freemasonry connection, and hoe does he know so much about the lodge in Wales and the masonic webring? I smell a stinking rat Mr Hinton.</span> </span></span></span></blockquote></span></span></span></span><p align="justify"><br /><span style="color:#333333;">To which we will reply, using small words. Mr Hinton did not go to <strong>any</strong> lengths to deny his Masonic connections, he merely pointed out that he is not a Freemason (lots of people aren't, you know). He does not claim to know anything about the lodge in Wales and the (non-existent) webring. <strong>We </strong>(not Bob) spent 10 <em>minutes</em> doing what the Hargoons should have done before posting their drivel on the Net--doing some basic research and checking the accuracy of their claims.<br /><br />We find it notable that the commentator did not ask herself why the <em>Hargoons </em>seem to know so much about the Lodge in Wales, hmm? Maybe the <em>Hargoons </em>are the Freemasons, employed to draw attention away from the Masonic Ripper theories by creating the perception that all those who are championing such theories are puerile thugs of limited intelligence and questionable sanity. If so, they are doing a fine job.</span></p><p align="justify"><span style="color:#333333;">But seriously.<br /><br />If their research for the attacks on Bob Hinton and others has been proven to be so dismally inadequate--and it's not like it was even <em>challenging</em> research--then is it reasonable to expect that their research on the Jack the Ripper case will not likely be any better? No, we don't think so either. </span></p>Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-61259474888126819352006-08-27T00:22:00.000-07:002006-08-27T02:16:10.027-07:00The Great Masonic Muddle<div align="justify">We find it most amusing that a group such as the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoons--</span>who believe a Masonic conspiracy lurks behind the Ripper crimes--are so proudly yet woefully ignorant about Freemasonry in general.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Here's the latest howler from the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoons</span>:</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">While one of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">SSR's</span> personalities is on a short break, the others have regurgitated some previously posted waffle about Bob Hinton's involvement with Freemasonry. Since it's a slow weekend we thought we'd check into some of their claims. This was just for fun, since it has been revealed that the "information" about Mr Hinton's Masonic connections was planted by an <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">acquaintance</span> of his precisely to prove that the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoons</span> will swallow any old tosh about those they are harassing.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">The results were both astounding and amusing. It also raises an interesting question: are the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoons</span> so blinded by spite that they will post anything, no matter how distorted and inaccurate, to harass one of their enemies? Or are they simply so stupid and self-deluded that they really believe their "research" and "investigating" fools <em>anyone </em>with IQs above the double digits?</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Here are their "claims" about that sneaky Mason, Bob Hinton.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="center"><strong>The Warm Up</strong></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Claim: <span style="color:#990000;">Bob Hinton is a member of the Lodge of Enterprise</span></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Actually: Well, possibly, although Mr Hinton says that he is not a Mason at all. But what is the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoon's</span> proof for this? Well, they went on the web and looked for a Lodge that had a website and was located in Wales. Get it? Bob is in Wales, Lodge of Enterprise is in Wales--obviously Bob <em>must</em> belong to the Lodge of Enterprise. </div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">No wait, it gets worse.....</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Claim: <span style="color:#990000;">The Lodge of Enterprise is "very prominently affiliated to the </span><a href="http://www.2be1ask1.com/emason/index.html"><span style="color:#990000;">Freemason Web Ring.</span></a><span style="color:#990000;">"</span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#990000;"></span></div><div align="justify">Actually: The Lodge of Enterprise <em>does</em> have a link to the E-mason <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">webring</span> on their homepage. A requirement of virtually <em>every</em> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">webring</span> is that you put their <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">webcode</span> on your homepage. However had the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoons</span> taken the extraordinary investigative step of <em>clicking on any of the buttons in the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">webring</span></em>, they would have <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_13">received</span> the following secret Masonic message</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="center"><span style="font-size:130%;">We haven't hosted the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_14" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">WebRing</span> in years.<br />Sorry!</span></div><div align="justify"><strong></strong></div><div align="justify">Only the centre, or hub, button leads to anything (we'll get to that next). So 20 <em>seconds</em> of further research shows a more likely scenario--the webmaster never got around to removing the code to a defunct <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_15" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">webring</span>.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Claim: "<span style="color:#990000;"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_16" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">SSR</span>2 believes they are affiliated to the Freemason <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_17" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">webring</span> to the extent they control it."</span></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Again, quite possibly, although considering that the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_18" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">webring</span> <em>doesn't have a single active site</em> anymore, we'd guess their duties as controller are not overly strenuous. Remember, this is the <em>second</em> time that the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_19" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoons</span> have posted this piffle without even taking the 20 seconds of "research" it would have required to prevent themselves from looking like abject morons.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="center"><strong>The Good Stuff</strong></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Here's where it goes from the sublime to the ridiculous. Remember that the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_20" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoons</span> subscribe to a Masonic Conspiracy theory for the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_21" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Whitechapel</span> Murders--that is important. So how does their knowledge of Masonry add up? Read and despair.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Claim: <span style="color:#990000;">Robert Hinton is an 8<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_22" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">th</span> degree Freemason. The title of the 8<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_23" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">th</span> degree is "<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_24" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Intendent</span> of the Building". Robert Hinton's title and status: <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_25" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Intendent</span> of the building.</span><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2201/3341/1600/gmasonry.0.jpg"></a></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#990000;">The '<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_26" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Intendent</span> of the Building' is charged with admissions and Masonic code recognition, in other words, he evaluates the position of any member of the Masonic community seeking to gain admission to any one particular lodge, either from a Masonic group or elsewhere, by implementing code routines and evaluating their knowledge and status. This <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_27">proceedure</span> is known as 'G'. It usually involves a specific lodge related variation on the 'G' routine.The masonic handshakes and all that.</span></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Actually: In this entire <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_28" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">mish</span>-mash of information, the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_29" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoons</span> managed to get exactly <em><strong>one</strong></em> fact correct--that the title of the 8<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_30" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">th</span> degree is the "<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_31" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Intendent</span> of the Building" (and <strong>that</strong> took a couple of tries and a hint from Bob, as they initially insisted it was "<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_32" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Intendent</span> of the Lodge").</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">The <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_33" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Intendent</span> of the Building is the <em>name of the</em> <em>degree</em>, <strong>not</strong> a job title. If a Lodge had six 8<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_34" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">th</span> degree members, they would <strong>all</strong> be "<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_35" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Intendents</span> of the Building" (meaning you'd have to run an entire gamut of people checking your worthiness to enter--would make for a long meeting, no?). Likewise if a Lodge had no 8<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_36" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">th</span> degree members, there would be no-one to perform the duties describe above, would there?</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">The duties as described in the above paragraph are actually performed by the <strong>Tyler</strong>. The Tyler can be of <em>any</em> degree, from 1-33 (some lodges require that he be 3rd or higher, some require a particular standard of skill or knowledge), and does not even have to be a practising Mason. Another curious thing is that a Mason <em>cannot act as Tyler for the Lodge to which he belongs.</em> So much for Bob being the guardian and gatekeeper for the Lodge of Enterprise.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">We'll say it again slowly in case the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_37" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoons</span> drop by: If Bob is a member of the Lodge the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_38" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoons</span> claim he is, then he can't perform the duties the claim he does. <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_39">Inversely</span> if Bob performs the duties that they claim he does, then he can't be a member of the Lodge they claim he is. And of course if Bob is not a Mason at all, theyve been taken for the suckers they are!</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">And how did we--lifelong non-Masons who are not even eligible to join a Masonic group--find this information? It took approximate 10 <em>minutes</em> of online research, including verification with independent sources.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">The seven <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_40" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoons</span> who presumably have spent <em>years </em>developing a theory of a Masonic/Ripper Conspiracy didn't manage to correctly state a <em>single readily available and verifiable fact</em> --we can only hope the rest of their "research" does not meet the same dismal calibre as displayed here.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">We'd strongly suggest, dear reader, that you keep this in mind when evaluating any claims made by SSR and their cronies.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div>Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-6137760852738709972006-08-25T02:15:00.001-07:002006-08-25T02:15:52.600-07:00Another Lie Exposed<div align="justify">Part two of our series of the recurring lies told by the "Exposing" blog.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"><strong>Lie #2: <em>We Do Not Endorse or Condemn Any Particular Ripper Theory</em></strong></div><div align="justify"><em></em></div><div align="justify">We admit that the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoon's</span> did a pretty good job of covering this one up for some time, but as their snug little universe continues to unravel it is obvious that this is totally untrue.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">It is now transparently clear that the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoons</span> favor a "Masonic/Aristocratic Conspiracy" approach to Jack the Ripper. If it were as simple as that, it would be no big deal--we recognize <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">everyone's</span> right to endorse, pursue and defend the theory of their choice. However what makes it <em>dishonest </em>is that they publicly proclaim impartiality while privately their commitment to this theory underpins their various campaigns of harassment and slander.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Karen and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">FJL</span> are allowed to access the resources and audience of the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoon</span> blog to launch exactly the kind of vicious and deceitful bullying and lies<em> that the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoons</span></em> <em>claim to</em> <em>oppose</em>. Why? Because both Karen and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">FJL</span> are proponents of Masonic Conspiracy theories.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">And because Karen and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">FJL</span> are (or have been) fellow travellers, anyone who gets on their bad side (we are generous in assuming that they <em>have</em> a good side) are immediately elevated to the rank of "<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Rippergoon</span>" without the slightest effort to confirm whether the allegations are true.</div><div align="justify">Of course even though the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoons</span> have disowned Karen and acknowledge that she manipulates facts to portray herself as victim, they continue to harass and defame those for whom Karen's ire is the <em>sole</em> reason for them being attacked on the "Exposing" blog at all. All because they will do <em>anything</em> rather than admit an error in judgement.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">And that's why such a small, seemingly insignificant lie needs to be exposed--because it has led to even more, slightly larger lies, which in turn have resulted in great injustices.</div>Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-77811894380143029092006-08-25T02:13:00.002-07:002006-08-25T02:14:51.434-07:00Will They Ever Learn?<div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">The irony is just too much.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Yesterday we published an entire article demonstrating how not only do the Hargoon's spend an awful lot of time trying to guess who posts comments to their blog, but also how incredibly <strong>bad</strong> at it they are...</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">And today they prove our point in spades by posting a long, typically childish article about how <strong>Stan Russo </strong>and <strong>Bob Hinton</strong> have created <em>this</em> blog. As always, the article is heavy on smear tactics (including the oft-repeated but still not funny "joke" of labelling people as apes of one sort or another) and utterly devoid of supporting evidence: we just had to shake our heads.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Like a confused pigeon that flies headfirst into a window just seconds after bouncing off the very same window, the Hargoon's show an amazing inablility to learn from their mistakes. It would be depressing were it not so damn funny.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">For the record, Stan Russo has <em>no</em> involvement with this blog. Not so much as a comment that we are aware of. Bob Hinton's participation has been open from the start: Comments in the comment's section, and the kind permission to publish the details of "Operation Fortitude 2".</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">We realize that the Hargoon's are too stupid to believe this, but we hope that you, gentle reader, are higher up the evolutionary scale and remember this display of investigative ineptitude when the Hargoon's tell you they "know" who Jack the Ripper is.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">On a related topic, we thought we'd take this opportunity to point out the Hargoon's latest cynical attempt to distort the truth--this time using our own blog as the vehicle.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">If you check under the comments for "A Plethora of Blogs" you will see a comment from "SSR" (the authors of the "Exposing" blog) that says: "<span style="color:#000099;">Just seen this. What an incredible loser of a blog</span>." This is an outright lie, that is easily disproven. </div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Despite a pathetic and transparent attempt to make it look like an old comment, it was submitted <strong>today </strong>(Aug. 25) . Since it appeared several days <em>after</em> they first talked about our blog on their site, including back-handed compliments and their hilarious "demands", it is an obvious lie that they had "Just seen this".</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">What really underscores their hopeless stupidity is that they planted this comment in response to an article that <em>clearly and obviously responds to one of their articles about us.</em> Surely they cannot be so clueless as to think that people will believe that they wrote an entire article about Flawed-Epiphany without ever having read our.....oh wait....that's exactly the kind of thing they <em>would</em> do.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Never mind....</div>Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-87536926460605478132006-08-25T02:13:00.001-07:002006-08-25T02:13:48.682-07:00Stop the Presses!<div align="justify">The Hargoon's posted this on their blog this morning:</div><br /><span style="color:#000099;">"The SSR team are taking a short break: since it's very quiet this week compared to the last few, this seems like the time to take a well earned break."</span><br /><span style="color:#000099;"></span><br /><span style="color:#000000;">Now what would prompt this "break", we ask ourselves?</span><br /><br /><div align="justify">Could it be that they have finally been embarassed at being exposed for the hopeless morons that they are? Read this contribution from Hargoon victim Bob Hinton and decide for yourself:</div><br /><div align="justify">Hello everyone,<br /><br />There can be few amongst us who has not heard of the rather pathetic attempt by a couple of unbalanced people to abuse and threaten certain people by means of a blog.<br /><br />Right from the start it was obvious that the truth meant nothing to them and the continued to tell the most ridiculous lies and use the most lavatorial comments in an attempt to ‘get back’ at those they believe had slighted them in some way.<br /><br />Personally speaking it didn’t matter to me at all but I was annoyed to see them spread their venom around in a totally indiscriminate way. I decided to do something about it. Thus was born Operation Fortitude 2.<br /><br />It consisted of feeding them information, which although totally false would be just the sort of thing that they would lap up by the bucket load. I am now going to demonstrate exactly what was fed to them so everyone can see just how gullible they have been.<br /><br /><span style="color:#cc0000;"><span style="color:#000000;">Exposers say:</span> Bob Hinton is a corrupt magistrate who abuses his position in the court to obtain information about people from sources unavailable to everyone else.</span><br /><br />Reality Check: I retired from the bench a few years ago. I no longer have any connection with the courts. So where did I get this secret information about various people from? Well this is a bit difficult to answer; as I’m not sure what information they are talking about. Possibly Karen is thinking of my knowledge of her address. She actually states that I hired a Private Investigator to do this; she names the firm and says she has proof! Well I confess I did use underhand methods to obtain that – I looked her up in the telephone book. This is of course a special secret telephone book that is only available to Magistrates and anyone else who wants to use it. As for information about anyone else – it’s all available on the net!<br /><br />Looks like you boobed there buffoons!<br /><br /><span style="color:#cc0000;"><span style="color:#000000;">Exposers say:</span> Bob Hinton uses his Freemason links to bully other people.</span><br /><br />Reality Check: Bob Hinton is not and has never has been a member of the Freemasons. The only connection with Freemasonry is the fact that his driving instructor in 1972 wore a Masonic ring, and his long deceased uncle may have been a mason. This information greedily lapped up by the Blog Buffoons was repeated time and time again, with acres of print interspersed with graphics et all. It came from one of my plants who sent in some bogus information. They loved it! Now you might think that’s being a bit underhand, however I did include a very obvious clue that this information was false. If the ‘Exposers’ had any respect for accuracy they would have spotted it immediately and not printed it. The clue was the information related to a Robert T Hinton. Bob does have middle initial – but it’s not T! If they had any intelligence at all you would have at least expected them to know who they were libelling!<br /><br />Looks like you boobed there buffoons!<br /><br /><span style="color:#cc0000;"><span style="color:#000000;">Exposers say:</span> Bob Hinton has connections with the CIA and British Security and is using these contacts to harass and bully people.</span><br /><br />Reality check: This information has again come from one of my plants and still refers to Robert T Hinton. For the record. My father was not called Frank George Hinton, he was not a member of SOE or MI6 (although like all the Hintons he did serve his country well and faithfully in uniform at the sharp end), he did not marry Flora Aidie and he did not have a cousin named Deane Roesch Hinton. Needless to say he did not have a son born in Ceylon named Robert T Hinton.<br /><br />His sister in law did not marry a CIA agent named Miles Copeland, and they didn’t live in the same village.<br /><br />Again any of these details could have easily been checked by doing just a few minutes research; however as we have seen research and accuracy are not the buffoons strong point.<br /><br />Looks like you boobed there buffoons<br /><br />Now that these ‘exposers’ have been thoroughly exposed as nasty minded, cowardly, foul-mouthed gullible buffoons, let us assign them the place they so richly deserve - in the dustbin!<br /><br />Bin those Buffoons!</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">We doubt that the Hargoon's will stay embarassed for long--their tenuous grip on reality will not let even this monumental exposure of ineptitude for long. But may--just maybe--they will actually make even a token effort to check some of their "facts" before continuing to show themselves up as the complete and utter cretins that we know them to be.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">We at Flawed Epiphany salute Mr Bob Hinton for a subtle and elegant operation that played out <strong>beautifully</strong>!</div>Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-39029697018134774782006-08-25T00:26:00.000-07:002006-08-25T02:00:31.254-07:00The Blog Remains the Same<div align="justify">We've noticed that the "Exposing" blog has renamed themselves "Jack Rip's Harpoon" for some reason. Possibly because it has finally sunk in that they are no longer the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">exposers</span> of bullying, but the bullies themselves. Whatever the reason, it's clear that the change doesn't extend much past the name--the tactics are still the same.</div><br /><div align="justify">Since most of their recent diatribes have either been incredibly complex flights of fancy against "Boob" Hinton, or playground-level whining about Maria <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Birchwood</span>--equally <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">laughable</span> and unsubstantiated--we thought we'd use today's entry to expose some of the minor yet consistent cheap tricks that the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoons</span> use. They share too things in common: they are deceitful, and they are so easily uncovered that it's amazing that they believe that <em>anyone</em> falls for them. </div><br />Grab some lemon for your tea, sit back, and read along.<br /><br />Lie #1:<em><strong>The <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoons</span> Respect Anonymity</strong></em><br /><br /><div align="justify">This is repeated on a semi-regular basis when encouraging readers to submit information through emails or in the comments section. Yet whenever a reader posts a comment that the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoons</span> don't appreciate, they spend a ridiculously large amount of time trying to identify the author of the comment. It is some consolation that they almost invariably identify the wrong person, although possibly not for the person they are falsely accusing. This <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">scattershot</span> approach to identifying commentators does <strong>not</strong> reflect well on the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoon's</span> ability to identify Jack the Ripper, now does it?</div><p align="justify"><br />You can find examples of your own, just by trawling through the comments section, but we'd like to highlight an incident where the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoon's</span> abysmal i<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">dentification</span> of a commentator lead to an entire article--and incidentally to the creation of <em>this</em> blog.<br /><br />The original article was a crude and childish attack on Mario Aleppo's daughter on the occasion of her <a href="http://exposingryderandwescott.blogspot.com/2006/08/mario-aleppo.html">wedding</a> (yes, they really <strong>are</strong> that tacky). Since we have never encountered Mr Aleppo, we asked a simple question:<br /><br /></p><a name="c115464322134007467"></a><span style="color:#000099;"><blockquote><span style="color:#000099;">Anonymous said...<br />What is your issue with Mario Aleppo?</span><br /><span style="color:#000099;"></span><br /><span style="color:#000099;">Is he a member of the Casebook?</span><br /></blockquote></span><br /><p>To which we received this reply:<span style="color:#000099;"><span style="color:#000099;"></p><blockquote><span style="color:#000099;"><span style="color:#000099;">annoyed said...<br />I once called the National Archives asking to see the Ripper letters and I got put through to him and he asked me some very rude questions, I put the phone down. And he is opening the door to thugs?What's the game?</span></span></blockquote><p></span></span>This sounded ominous to anyone researching the Ripper case, so we asked for more information:<span style="color:#000099;"><span style="color:#000099;"></p><blockquote><span style="color:#000099;"><span style="color:#000099;">Anonymous said...<br />What kind of questions did he ask?</span><br /><span style="color:#000099;">Where the questions themselves rude, or just the way he asked them?</span><br /><span style="color:#000099;">Does he often give people a difficult time, or just over the Ripper items?</span><br /></span></blockquote></span></span><br />Which elicited the following response:<span style="color:#000099;"><span style="color:#000099;"> <blockquote><span style="color:#000099;"><span style="color:#000099;">annoyed said...<br />When I called him it was the questions. </span><span style="color:#000099;">You have to have a pedigree degree<br />just to get in the door and I also got the impression he was a snob type. Very<br />rude and unpleasant.</span><br /></span></blockquote></span><p align="justify"><br /><span style="color:#000000;">Well, at this point it sounded like Mr Aleppo was merely doing his job, although there was still a chance that the accusation against him had some merit, so we asked an obvious question:</span> </span></p><a name="c115465261080610761"></a><span style="color:#000099;"><span style="color:#000099;"><blockquote><span style="color:#000099;">Anonymous said...<br />From curiosity, has anyone contacted Mr <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Aleppo's</span> superior to complain about his<br />conduct? What was the response?</span></blockquote></span><span style="color:#000099;"><p></span></p><p align="justify"></span>At which point what had been a perfectly civil and reasonable exchange entered into typical Hargoon territory, starting with an anonymous comment that can only be described as "paranoid":<br /></p><a name="c115472018214072741"></a><span style="color:#000099;"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><blockquote><span style="color:#000099;"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">tellthedumbass</span> said... </span><br /><span style="color:#000099;"><br />Is it perhaps possible those questions were from Mario Aleppo wondering if he is going to get the sack.</span><br /></blockquote></span></span><br /><p align="justify">Most normal people would rightfully have laughed this off, but then SSR is not exactly a poster-child for "normal", hence the following response:</p><span style="color:#000099;"><blockquote><p><span style="color:#000099;">Interesting point caller, it's true he doesn't look out for anyone except his fat ass. </span></p><p><span style="color:#000099;">However since he's retiring he probably doesn't give a damn anyhow. They are odd questions though.</span></p></blockquote></span><div align="justify">Odd? They didn't seem odd to us. Someone had made a vague accusation against an individual and we were trying to learn more, both about the specifics of the accusation and the evidence supporting it. We suppose in the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_14" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">topsy</span>-<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_15" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">turvy</span> world of the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_16" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hargoons</span>--where accusations are there to be made, not proven-- such a thing may be considered "odd". We attempt to explain <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_17">ourselves</span>, in a simple, non-confrontational way:</div><a name="c115475600154297326"></a><span style="color:#000099;"><span style="color:#000099;"><blockquote><span style="color:#000099;">Anonymous said... </span><br /><br /><span style="color:#000099;">Why are the questions odd?</span><br /><span style="color:#000099;"></span><br /><span style="color:#000099;">Mr Aleppo has earned a spot on your blog, but doesn't seem to be a member of the casebook--when I asked why, the response was that he asked rude questions.</span><br /><span style="color:#000099;"></span><br /><span style="color:#000099;">Since one day I may need to visit the Archives it makes sense to try and find out what those rude questions might be, no?</span><br /><span style="color:#000099;"></span><br /><span style="color:#000099;">However I never did get any detail. Luckily if I contact the Archives after April it likely won't matter, although if those questions are standard procedure I may still encounter them from his successor, so I'd like a preview if possible.</span></blockquote></span><p align="justify"></span><span style="color:#000000;">Seem fair? Rational so far? We certainly thought so. However the folks on the blog, readers and authors alike, did not seem to think so Despite giving them yet <em>another</em> opportunity to explain their issue with Mr Aleppo, the next three comments showed up in rapid succession:</span></p><a name="c115476289076645823"></a><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_18" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span style="color:#000099;"><blockquote><a href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/27371673" rel="nofollow"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_18" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span style="color:#000099;">shamingstephenryder</span></span></a><a href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/27371673" rel="nofollow"><span style="color:#000099;"> said... </span><br /><br /><span style="color:#000099;">Dear me what <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_19" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">nurds</span> turn up sometimes!</span><br /><br /></a><a title="comment permalink" href="http://exposingryderandwescott.blogspot.com/2006/08/mario-aleppo.html#115476289076645823"><span style="color:#000099;">12:28 AM</span></a><a href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/27371673" rel="nofollow"><span style="color:#000099;"> </span></a><a title="Delete Comment" style="BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none" href="http://www.blogger.com/delete-comment.g?blogID=31033486&postID=115476289076645823"><span style="color:#000099;"></span></a><a href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/27371673" rel="nofollow"><span style="color:#000099;"></span><br /><br /></a><a name="c115476292767933388"></a><a href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/27371673" rel="nofollow"><span style="color:#000099;">Anonymous said... </span><br /><br /><span style="color:#000099;">IT IS CODE1888.<br /></span></a><a title="comment permalink" href="http://exposingryderandwescott.blogspot.com/2006/08/mario-aleppo.html#115476292767933388"><span style="color:#000099;">12:28 AM</span></a><a href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/27371673" rel="nofollow"><span style="color:#000099;"> </span></a><a title="Delete Comment" style="BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none" href="http://www.blogger.com/delete-comment.g?blogID=31033486&postID=115476292767933388"><span style="color:#000099;"></span></a><a href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/27371673" rel="nofollow"><span style="color:#000099;"></span><br /><br /></a><a name="c115476313504971796"></a><a href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/27371673" rel="nofollow"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_20" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span style="color:#000099;">shamingstephenryder</span></span></a><a href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/27371673" rel="nofollow"><span style="color:#000099;"> said... </span><br /><br /><span style="color:#000099;">Thanks, yes it does seem to be the case.Philippe R <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_21" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Welté</span> ( the man who is asking questions) is a crook and a revolting fraud, and we will be doing a big e<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_22" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">xposé </span>on him soon.We think he is as likely to get into the National Archives as the backside of an<br />Elephant.<br /></span></a><a title="comment permalink" href="http://exposingryderandwescott.blogspot.com/2006/08/mario-aleppo.html#115476313504971796"><span style="color:#000099;">12:32 AM</span></a><a href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/27371673" rel="nofollow"><span style="color:#000099;"> </span></a><a title="Delete Comment" style="BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none" href="http://www.blogger.com/delete-comment.g?blogID=31033486&postID=115476313504971796"><span style="color:#000099;"></span></a><a href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/27371673" rel="nofollow"><br /></blockquote></span></span></a><div align="justify">Not only were they <em>completely</em> off the mark, but so much for their much vaunted promise of anonymity.</div><br /><div align="justify"><strong>Shortly after, </strong>the Ha<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_23" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">rgoon's p</span>ublished this <a href="http://exposingryderandwescott.blogspot.com/2006_08_01_exposingryderandwescott_archive.html#115476718477813079">article</a> about Philippe We<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_24" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">lté, </span>a man that we have never communicated with. In it, the bloggers accuse Mr Wel<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_25" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">té of</span> "<span style="color:#000099;">lurking on our post exposing Mario Aleppo of the National Archives for lias<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_26" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">ing rec</span>ently with ripp<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_27" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">erthugs to </span>find out what questions he should ask to get inside the door at the National Archives</span>." Now, ignoring for a moment that they got <em>the wrong person entirely</em>, look back at the exchange and marvel at the distortion of events.</div><br /><div align="justify">This is only one of many examples of these recurring and blatant attempts by Harg<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_28" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">oons to </span>guess the identity of anonymous commentators, and further to use that (usually incorrect) identification <em>as the basis for future harassment of that person</em>. This from a group that <strong>claims</strong> to respect and guard the anonymity of all contributors--really they mean all contributors who shamelessly kiss their röv <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_29" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">an</span>d don't rock the boat with awkward questions or comments.</div><br />Stayed tuned for <em>Lie #2...</em>Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-48585827065435205932006-08-23T00:51:00.000-07:002006-08-23T01:15:49.363-07:00Bird on the Blog-Summary<div align="justify">We realize the previous article quite long--and therefore will likely tax the attention span of the average "Exposing" blog reader. That's why we've summarized the specific allegations we investigated and our conclusions based on the evidence.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Claim:</div><div align="justify">Magpie has a many posts about the "Aristocratic Conspiracy" dating back a long time.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Fact:</div><div align="justify">Not true. Four posts about the Cleveland St scandal over the last week is evidence of neither of the above claims. Dishonestly lumping Druit in with this "aristocratic conspiracy" theory is the <em>only</em> way it vaguely approaches validating that claim--and as we pointed out that is dishonest.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Claim:</div><div align="justify">Magpie posts a lot of material about Prince Eddy.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Fact:</div><div align="justify">"Exposing" is referring to a <em>single</em> post, taken completely out of context.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Claim:</div><div align="justify">Magpie "constantly" promotes James Tulley's book "The Secret of Prisoner 1167"</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Fact:</div><div align="justify">While we haven't check all 800 posts by Magpie, we sampled enough that if this were true we would have found at least some evidence. We didn't. Our guarded verdict on this is that it is false.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Claim:</div><div align="justify">Magpie's knowledge that there are 2 Albion Streets in London is suspicious.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Fact:</div><div align="justify">Completely laughable. We hope the author of that statement does not have access to a motor vehicle.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Claim:</div><div align="justify">That Magpie has "<span style="color:#000099;">bothered the life out of Karen ever since she claimed to be writing on Cleveland Street, for some odd reason</span><span style="color:#666666;">"</span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#666666;"></span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#333333;">Fact:</span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#333333;">Based on our investigation of the previous claim, we found that Magpie, far from bothering the life out of Karen, in fact helped her find information for her book. Not only does original exchange still exist, but so too does Karen's acknowledgment of that assistance. Karen also thanked Magpie (among others) for this help on the casebook forum <strong>and in her book</strong>.</span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#333333;"></span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#333333;">Since we have no access to the subject of the "Exposing" blog's latest defamation attempt, we cannot confirm the accuracy of their claims of Mason affiliations, Magistrate position, or publishing business. Based on their woeful treatment of information readily available, we'd hazard to guess that the blogger's conclusions/speculations are the usual combination of error, wishful thinking, slander, and complete bullshit. More information would be welcome, particularly from the subject in question.</span></div>Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-36464829144506185732006-08-22T21:38:00.000-07:002006-08-23T00:02:42.726-07:00A Bird on the Blog<div align="justify">Well, after an eventful weekend on the "Exposing" blog, replete with acrimonious infighting, the authors have settled back into their normal routine.</div><br /><div align="justify">Their latest subject/victim is called "Magpie", who appears for some reason to have earned a spot on Karen's "enemies list". Since we don't know much this person, and unlike the "Exposing" team we lack luxury of simply inventing things, we decided to take them up on their suggestion to check out Magpie's posting history. We also took a brief look back on the "Exposing" blog to see what the scoop is.</div><br />Supposedly Magpie is an <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">aficionado</span> of the "aristocratic conspiracy" angle of the Ripper killings--or is he? Here's what the bloggers claimed:<br /><br /><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;">Here's the </span><a style="COLOR: rgb(102,51,0)" href="http://forum.casebook.org/search.php?searchid=52885&pp=25&page=2"><span style="color:#000099;">link to all his posts</span></a>. <span style="color:#000099;">Turn a couple of pages merely and you'll see he's very preoccupied with everything that surrounds Cleveland Street and the aristocracy theme, with a particular enthusiasm for a Montague <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Druitt</span></span> analysis. He and Bob Hinton (particularly) have bothered the life out of Karen ever since she claimed to be writing on Cleveland Street, for some odd reason best known to themselves.</span></div><br /><div align="justify">The first thing we notice is that Magpie has over 800 posts--since the bloggers did not specify just where the above evidence is located, we think the intent is pretty obvious. If you give your readers a list of 800-odd posts and say "it's in there somewhere", chances are they won't bother to read them all and just accept your word for it. We went through several pages, both in order and with random samples, and were unable to find a <em>single</em> post about Cleveland Street, Prince Eddy, or any Masonic conspiracies. </div><br /><div align="justify">The same with the threads that Magpie has started. There were few enought that we could check them all. The only <em>remotely</em> Masonic-related post was an amusing comparison between the Ripper case and The <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Da</span></span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Vinci</span></span> Code, which appeared in the Pub Talk section: a section devoted to general chit-chat and off topic banter.</div><br /><div align="justify">The second thing we noticed was that in order to "prove" the accusation that "he's very preoccupied with everything that surrounds Cleveland Street and the aristocracy theme", the bloggers are reduced to including every post that Magpie contributed to the M.J. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Druitt</span></span> section. This would be considered a blatant and cynical misrepresentation by most, for the "Exposing" blog it's just business as usual.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">The article about Eddie that arch-conspirator Magpie posted on <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">jtrforums</span>.com was a transcript of a letter to a well-known history magazine. It was <em>immediately</em> followed by another post from Magpie about <em>another </em>magazine's recent article about Ripper suspect Neil Cream. The subject of the thread? Recent magazine articles about Jack the Ripper. Can anyone say "distorting the facts"? Yes, we thought so too.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">Claims that Magpie constantly promotes Jame's Tully's Secret of Prison 1167 are completely without foundation-we have to wonder how he can simultaneously be constantly promoting <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">the</span> Masonic Theory, the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Druitt</span> theory <strong>and</strong> the Kelly Theory. Granted there are 800 posts, and we didn't read all of them, but if he was as vocal about Tully's book as the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">blogger's</span> claim, we should have encountered it at least a few times--we didn't find a <em>single </em>one.</div><br />Obviously the source for the article was one of Karen's tirades, which said in part:<br /><span style="color:#000099;"><span style="color:#000099;"><blockquote><span style="color:#000099;"><span style="color:#000099;">On Howard's website, Magpie keeps talking about Karen and her book and waxing poetic about Cleveland Street like he actually knows what he's talking about....Yet he still carries on about Lord Arthur Somerset, squawking like the birdbrain that he is.</span> </span></blockquote></span><br /></span><span style="color:#000099;"></span><div align="justify">So we looked up those messages on <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">jtrforums</span></span>.com and we found some interesting results. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the "Exposing" bloggers have displayed their usual degree of fairness, accuracy and truthfulness--in other words, almost none.</div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">The most interesting part of the exchange is that it <em>starts</em> on August 18--less than a week ago. </div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">So much for a long-standing obsession. But aside from that, let's look at what he actually said:</div><br /><span style="color:#000099;"><blockquote><span style="color:#000099;">Is there any evidence that Somerset was a pedophile? When asked about previous criminal activity, we're told that he was a pedophile, but is there evidence of that? I thought the Cleveland Street scandal was about homosexuality, pure and simple. Is there more to it than that?</span></blockquote></span><div align="justify">Far from "waxing poetic" or claiming any profound knowledge about the Cleveland Street scandal, Magpie is obviously <em>requesting</em> clarification about one of Karen's claims: that the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">rentboys</span></span> at the notorious brothel were 8 years old. (n.b. We find it interesting that <em>no-one</em> provided evidence to back up Karen's claim, <em>including Karen. </em>Several people refuted it. We aren't here to judge <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">anyone's</span> theory, so we'll leave it at that). </div><div align="justify">Magpie contributed <em>four</em> posts about the Cleveland St <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7">scandal, all of them polite, sincere and containing no personal comment's directed at Karen. In summary, it appeared a legitimate attempt to learn something</span>: certainly nothing calling for Karen to declare<span style="color:#000099;"> "Well, it would seem that we now have another obsessive personality on our hands."</span> This coming from a woman who posts four <strong>times </strong>that many posts <strong>a day</strong> about the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Baphomet</span></span>. If the irony were any heavier you could build a second Eiffel Tower with it.</div><br />Although we considered it too trivial to mention, by chance we uncovered the real story behind another assertion made by the "Exposing" team. It proved very interesting and paid us back in full for the time we spent trawling through old posts:<br /><br /><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000099;">One informant asked him a question about Albion Street, London, and he was immediately able to state that there were two, which raised alarm bells sky high.</span> </div><p><br />We fail to see why having any knowledge about the streets of London is cause for alarm, which is why we initially dismissed it we ran across the following exchange which paints an entirely different story, and effectively undermines many of Karen's claims:</p><p>The" informant" was actually Karen <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Trenouth</span></span>, erstwhile author of "Epiphany" and the exchange is a far cry from the "Exposing" claim that Magpie has "<span style="color:#000099;">bothered the life out of Karen ever since she claimed to be writing on Cleveland Street, for some odd reason</span> ..."</p><br /><blockquote>Karen: <span style="color:#000099;">There is a Margaret <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_13" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Giffin</span></span> on Albion Street. Can someone out there let me know where Albion Street is in relation to the murder sites?</span></blockquote><br /><blockquote>Magpie: <span style="color:#cc0000;">There are currently 2 Albion St in London. One in <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_14" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Westminister</span></span>, near Hyde Park, and one in <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_15" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Southwark</span></span>, South of the river.</span> </blockquote><blockquote>Karen: <span style="color:#000099;">Thanks Magpie. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_13" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_16" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Hmmm</span></span>............ Lord Arthur Somerset had his home and stables near Hyde Park. I will double check that though.</span></blockquote><blockquote><p>Karen: <span style="color:#000099;">Magpie, would the Hyde Park Barracks be close to Albion Street. How close? I feel that we're onto something here. It's really niggling away at me.</span></p><p>Magpie: <span style="color:#cc0000;">Well, not particularly. Albion Street is north of Hyde Park in Westminster, and the Barracks in is <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_14" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_17" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Knightsbridge</span></span>, to the south of the Park.</span> </p></blockquote><blockquote><p>Magpie: <span style="color:#cc0000;">I'm a little confused, Karen.I thought you had dropped Dr Alfred Pearson in favour of Albert Pearson the moulder? Are you now back to the good Doctor?</span></p></blockquote><blockquote>Karen: <span style="color:#000099;">Please don't be confused. I have not dropped the doctor at all. The doctor is very important indeed. The moulder, Albert Henry Pearson, was probably the trowel-swinging hoaxer. The police were probably getting very close to the location of the good doctor so a hoax was contrived to draw attention away from the good doctor. You see, the moulder used Alfred's name, to deflect attention away from Mr. Cousin Doctor. Get it? The moulder, Albert, used the name Alfred at <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_15" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_18" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Brierley</span></span> Hill Police Station so that Alfred Pearson would be a name associated with a hoaxer. I<br />simply, just exposed the REAL Alfred Pearson, the Surgeon. If you have any other<br />questions, please just ask Magpie. Thanks</span></blockquote><p align="justify">(n.b.: compare this friendly encouragement for Magpie to ask questions to Karen's later responses when Magpie did just that. Although hindsight has shown us all that the fastest way to end up on the "Epiphany" hit list is to question <em>anything</em> about the theory, perhaps Magpie was naive to take this offer at face value. We hope he has learned his lesson).</p>Later in the thread Karen acknowledges Magpie's contribution and makes a light-hearted offer:<br /><br /><span style="color:#000099;"><blockquote><span style="color:#000099;">Magpie:You're hilarious!!! I was thinking that since you helped with some of my research <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_16" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_19" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">vis</span></span> a <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_17" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_20" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">vis</span></span> a street name, that I could possibly give you a role in the movie. Do you act? You could portray Catherine <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_18" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_21" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Eddowes</span></span>, complete with fire engine impersonations</span>.</blockquote></span><br /><br />To which Magpie offered an equally humorous reply:<br /><br /><span style="color:#cc0000;"><blockquote><span style="color:#cc0000;">I'm very flattered by the offer Karen, but alas I must decline.While my religion encourages <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_19" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_22" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">crossdressing</span></span> in order to embrace the cosmic duality found in all sentient things (<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_20" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_23" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Eructions</span></span> 21:12) it strictly forbids the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_21" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_24" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">mimesis</span></span> of any form of emergency response vehicle (Amphibians 3:22).</span></blockquote></span><br /><br /><div align="justify">Although we only know him through the very posts that "Exposing" and Karen claim paint him as a monster, Magpie comes across as a patient, friendly person who took the time and effort to help Karen with some information. We admit it was not ground breaking research by any means, but he didn't <em>have</em> to do it at all, especially when we see how Karen has returned the favour.</div><br /><div align="justify">We haven't even touched on the "copyright" fiasco, since we assumed it was simply a legal issue between two people and of interest to nobody. Even the "Exposing" authors have told Karen pointedly to shut up about the issue because no-one cares. In light of Karen's vehemence, and "<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_25" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Exposing's</span>" tendency to parrot back whatever Karen feeds them with no critical evaluation whatsoever, we are rethinking our stance and investigating further.</div><br /><div align="justify">We've already uncovered some interesting posts concerning copyrights from Karen, Magpie, Lars Poster, Dan <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_22" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_26" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Norder</span></span> and others that call into question Karen's hysterical claims on the "Exposing" blog. It appears that Karen has a history of claiming copyright infringement and threatening legal action on the <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_27">flimsiest</span> of pretexts. We believe there may be enough for an article, and we are working on that. For now we will give Karen the last word, from a post on casebook.org following the completion of her book:</div><br /><span style="color:#000099;"><blockquote><span style="color:#000099;">The nice people I mention in my book are <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_23" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_28" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Spryder</span></span>(of course), <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_24" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_29" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">GaryW</span></span>, Christoper J. Morley, Diana and Magpie. Thank you friends!! </span></blockquote></span>Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-42732852594406494512006-08-21T00:20:00.000-07:002006-08-21T01:36:30.944-07:00A Plethora of Blogs<div align="justify">The "Exposing" bloggers have kindly posted a list of conditions under which they will <em>allow</em> this blog to continue (they seem to be confused about whether to be thugs or anti-thugs, it seems). <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">It is a long post</span></span>, so we will refer the reader to the other blog to read it in it's entirety, but we will briefly respond to the salient parts of it. </div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">The parts from "Exposing" are in <em>italics.</em><br /><br /><em>1. This new blog will remain 'above' board' like this one. It can employ humour, but it is not permitted to resort to violent style or abuse.</em><br /><em></em><br />So calling us "Jokers", Germans and Scandinavians "<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">Nazis</span></span>", French people "frogs", innocent bystanders "probable perverts", and posting the addresses, employers and other personal information about people is not "violent style or abuse"?. Give us a...oh wait, we just realized your first condition is an example of your "humour". Never mind. Good one!<br /><br /><em>2. Our informants K and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">FJL</span></span> are to be completely left alone. They are not to be harassed or bothered in any shape or form. They are innocent women. You may criticise information only, if it is in dispute.</em><br /><em></em><br />We're happy to concede to that; <strong>not </strong>because you asked us to, but because we have no desire to adopt your methods. This does <strong>not</strong> mean that we will allow their claims and comments on your blog pass without examination and, where warranted, challenge and/or rebuttal.<br /><br /><em>3.. Unidentified informants are not be stalked out, identified and harassed.</em><br /><br />You mean, like you do on a regular basis? We have no interest in stalking or harassing your informants. It is <strong>precisely </strong>the kind of behaviour that <strong>you</strong> have displayed and that led to the creation of this blog. We have better things to do with our time than trying to ferret out the names and other personal information about your <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">grasses</span>.<br /><br />We'd ask you to agree to your own demand, but we realize it would deprive you of two-thirds of your material. Besides, from what we've witnessed, most attempts at identifying those who post to your blog are so inaccurate that we are compiling an entire article based around some of the funniest of your howlers.<br /><br /><em>4. All blogs you have erected about the revealed two of our informants are cleaned out and come down.</em><br /><em></em><br /><em>(list of blogs follows)</em><br /><em></em><br /><em>These blogs must all be destroyed and deleted.In response, we undertake to delete all blogs regarding <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Ripperologists</span></span> outside of the 'Exposing Ryder and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Wescott</span></span>' Blog. We give our word publicly that as soon as the other blogs all come down, it will be done.</em><br /><em></em><br />We would like to see those blogs disappear also, since this blog was founded as much to oppose <em>them</em> as to oppose you. We have had no hand in their creation, we have not contributed to them nor do we endorse them. We even left a comment to that effect on your blog when the original <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">FLJ</span></span> blog appeared. We give you our word that this is our <strong>only</strong> blog on the subject, and will remain so.<br /><br /><em>You are also to cease circulating abusive and slanderous emails about <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">FJL</span></span> and K to people in communication them. You have been doing this for months, ever since <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">FJL</span></span> appeared on the web. Yes, shame on the creeps who <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">dialogued</span></span> with you. But it's irrelevant. This pathetic cowardice stops today.</em><br /></div><em></em><div align="justify">We cannot "cease" what we have not been doing to begin with. We have not, nor would we, circulate any email such as you <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10">described</span>--about anyone. Read our very first post--we will not post anything from an anonymous email source, and are not interested in spreading malicious gossip about anyone.<br /><br /><em>Lawyers are already working on the blogs you erected to attack and humiliate K and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">FJL</span></span> and they are unlikely to remain standing in any event.</em><br /><em></em><br />See above. We would fervently hope that those responsible for those blogs would remove them of their own accord, likewise we would like to see you do the same. Unfortunately we cannot force them, or you, to comply.<br /><br /><em>Police are working on Daniel Hart, a loner and known nuisance, who is hardly of any assistance to you.</em><br /><br />We do not know Daniel Hart, we have had no contact with him, and we know nothing about his history with <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">FLJ</span> apart from that which appears on your blog (which we are forced to conclude is not an <em>entirely </em>unbiased source. Nonetheless the whole thing seems rather tawdry to us and holds little interest).<br /><br /><em>The name of your blog must change. It must not imply Karen's book. There are better names. Also, <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_13" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">FJL</span></span> has insisted that your <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_14" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">username</span></span> '<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_15" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_13" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">nemo</span></span>' must change. Walter <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_16" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_14" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Sickert</span></span> would himself be more than disgusted at the sight of you apparently. Call it a fad, but we enjoy being on the right side of her.</em><br /><em></em><br />As far as <em>must</em>, get over yourselves.<br /><br />As it happens we <strong>are</strong> considering a new name for the blog, since it is not, nor has it ever been, our intention to judge Karen's theory or book on this blog. We don't happen to agree with Ms <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_17" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_15" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Trenouth's</span></span> theory (then again, neither do you), but we think that her achievement should be acknowledged. We do like the way "Flawed Epiphany" sounds, on the other hand, and we are wary of giving you the impression that you can arbitrarily tell us what to do. So we'll continue to work on it, but it's not our top priority.<br /><br />As for <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_18" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_16" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">FJL's</span></span> "insistence" about our <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_19" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_17" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">username</span></span>, we will certainly consider it <strong>when and if</strong> Mr <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_20" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_18" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Sickert</span></span> contacts us personally to make his feelings known. Given available accounts of his life, we disagree with <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_21" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_19" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">FLJ's</span></span> assertions about what he would or wouldn't find amusing.<br /><br />I think we've pretty much answered everthing. Let us know if we missed anything significant. In return, we have a couple of demands--requests, rather--of our own.<br /><br />1. That you remove certain persons and entities from the "enemies" list, as they are there based on nothing more than Karen's latest fit of pique. These include, but are not limited to:</div><br /><ol><li><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_22" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_20" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">jacktheripper</span></span>.<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_23" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_21" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">de and its owner</span></span></li><li>Maria <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_24" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_22" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Birchwood</span></span></li><li>Jana, the author of Sojourn.</li></ol><p>If further evidence convinces you that their addition was in fact justified, fair enough--our respective blogs can engage in debate about these people based on their actions, rather than unsubstantiated gossip.<br /><br />2. That in future you cease <em>adding</em> names to said list (and therefore your blog) based on nothing more substantial than Ms <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_25" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_23" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Trenouth's</span></span> say-so. In short, we are asking you serve the very ethic you claim to champion--that of discouraging bullies--rather than becoming a tool for the bullying of others. Surely in a field based almost <em>entirely</em> on research and the weighing of evidence, finding out if an accusation is even remotely justified cannot be that hard, can it?<br /><br />You will note that there are only two conditions, and that accepting them will actually increase your credibility. Of course a polite apology (nothing fancy) for calling us cowards for doing the same thing you are doing would be nice, but we are resigned to the fact that it's unlikely.</p>Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-67935349317416392312006-08-20T01:00:00.000-07:002006-08-20T01:37:51.387-07:00The Big Picture?<div align="justify">Bob Hinton has been accused several times of stalking the author of "Epiphany" with alleged "evidence" being posted on the "Exposing" blog.</div><br /><div align="justify">A recurring story about Bob is that he obtained a photograph of Karen's husband by some nefarious method. Supposedly Bob's derogatory comments about Mr <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Trenouth</span> are a thinly veiled threat designed to intimidate Karen by proving how easily he can obtain personal and confidential information about her.</div><br />Like much of Mr Hinton's "stalking", the facts are somewhat less alarming.<br /><br /><div align="justify">During an exchange with Bob, after confirming that she lived in <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Sudbury</span>, Karen posted a long, rather humorous and <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">apparently</span> good-natured message that said, in part:</div><span style="color:#000066;"><blockquote><span style="color:#000066;">So, when can I expect your arrival, Bob? Just remember though - I have a wood-block knife set by the door. Plus, my husband is 6 foot 2 and 250 pounds! Everyone says he looks like Tom <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Selleck</span>. Have you ever been to Ontario, Bob? It's beautiful - lots of lakes!!</span> </blockquote></span>To which Bob later responded:<br /><br /><span style="color:#000066;"><blockquote><span style="color:#000066;">Dear Karen,</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;"></span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">"Plus, my husband is 6 foot 2 and 250 pounds! Everyone says he looks like Tom <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Selleck</span>"</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;"></span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">So he doesn't look like his photograph then?</span><br /></blockquote></span><br /><div align="justify">And that's it. A <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">smart ass</span> reply to an equally <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6">smart ass</span> post. <em>Never </em>did (or has) Bob <em>ever</em> claim to have a photograph of Karen's husband, much less used such a photo to threaten Karen. If anything, Karen should be relieved that Bob chose not to take the explicit threat in Karen's post seriously, but instead accepted that it was a joke and responded in kind.</div><br /><div align="justify">This one of the reasons why there is a common view that Karen is somewhat impredictable. When in a mellow mood, she is prepared to joke or chat with people: however when her mood (inevitably) turns sour and she feels persecuted, <em>everything </em>that <em>anyone</em> has said to her becomes evidence of stalking, harassment, or intimidation. The smallest remark is inflated and distorted in a way calculated to make her look like the victim and the other person like the aggressor.</div><br /><div align="justify">There are many examples of this type of distortion. This one was chosen because it demonstrates how a simple comment can become something totally different in Karen's retelling. It was also chosen because despite Karen repeating the new and improved version of the story many times, the truth can be readily seen by simply reading the original posts.</div><div align="justify"></div><p align="justify">This is <strong>not</strong> to say that Karen has never been abused, or that she has deserved the treatment that she has received by many in the Ripper world-- and likely outside it too. We believe that Karen has had a very difficult time of things and we sympathize with her. However, just because a person has been a victim in <strong>some</strong> cases does not mean that they have been the victim in <strong>all </strong>cases. Nor does it entitle that person to in turn victimize others at will, including those who have defended or supported her in the past--a tendency of Karen's that even her allies at the "Exposing" blog have noticed and commented on several times. </p>Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-38948197939012101942006-08-18T22:50:00.000-07:002006-08-19T00:17:40.478-07:00(re)Making History<div align="justify"><span style="color:#000000;">Karen <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Trenouth</span>, author of "Epiphany of the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">Whitechapel</span> Murders", has shown a recurring tendency to rewrite events to suit her own agenda--and we aren't talking about her book here.<br /><br />Here's an example of a comment Karen left on the "Exposing" blog:<br /></span><br /></div><span style="color:#000066;"><blockquote><span style="color:#000066;">Actually, now that I think of it. Boob Hinton also said something ominous to me a ways back. I was on Casebook and I mentioned, just in passing, that I had paid <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">alot</span> for some photos from The National Archives and Bob Hinton then retorted, "What photos are you looking for - maybe I can help you"<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">HAHHA</span> Yeah, right. I just ignored him and he got pissed off. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">heh</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">heh</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">heh</span></span><br /></blockquote></span><div align="justify"><br /><span style="color:#000000;">Now perhaps, like us, you fail to see what is so ominous about Mr Hinton's reply--it would seem to a casual observer to be a simple offer of assistance. But for now we'll accept that "ominous" can mean different things to different people. The real purpose of this exercise is to demonstrate how Karen adopts a certain "flexibility" to reporting events.<br /><br />Let's replay the actual exchange between Karen and Bob and see how it measures up.<br /><br />It started when Bob posted a comment expressing doubt about the validity of self-publishing (an opinion he is entitled to but that has little bearing on the topic at hand). Karen posted a lengthy reply to a comment by someone else, adding this postscript:<br /></span><br /></div><span style="color:#000066;"><blockquote><span style="color:#000066;">Oh, and Bob:</span><br /><br /><span style="color:#000066;">My publisher is actually taking on the National Archives. He said that he doesn't like what they're trying to do to me!! They are charging me 30 pounds for a colour photo<br />of Lord Arthur! I could steal Mr. Poster' s for free!<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">MUAHAHAHAHAHA</span>!! It's already in my database <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8" onclick="BLOG_clickHandler(this)">HAHAHAHAHAHAHA</span>!! It's my turn!!</span> </blockquote><div align="justify"></span>Two things immediate spring to mind. The first is that, far from being something "mentioned, just in passing", this comment is directly addressed to Bob. The second is that contrary to Karen's later claim, she had <em>not</em> yet paid a lot of money for the photos. Rather she was describing her efforts to <em>avoid</em> paying a lot of money for the photos. This is not a minor difference, as it changes the entire context of Bob's reply. </div><br /><div align="justify">It's also interesting to note that given Karen's later claims of over 300 pounds for a single picture, 30 pounds doesn't seem like a lot after all. But onwards...<br /><br />Here was Bob's reply. Compare it very carefully to Karen's later version.<br /><br /></div><span style="color:#000066;"><blockquote><span style="color:#000066;">Dear Karen,</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;"></span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">What National Archives are you talking about? If you want pictures for your book I suggest you contact a picture library - they usually charge about £100 - £250 per picture.</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;"></span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">If you get hold of a copy of the Writers and Artists Year book I believe they have contact details in there.</span><br /></blockquote></span><div align="justify"><br />Ominous? It's extremely difficult to find the slightest hint of anything ominous about Bob's reply. A courteous, helpful suggestion offered without anything that could be construed as malice or ill-intent.<br /><br />Karen was <em>partially </em>accurate about one thing: She didn't acknowledge Bob's post <em>about the photographs</em>. She did not ignore him totally, as she continued to direct posts at him (concerning his "investigation" of her, which we will save for another time). After a series of unbelievably vitriolic posts from Karen aimed at everyone on the thread, Bob posted the message that Karen characterized as "pissed off"<br /><br />Here's an example of only one of the posts by Karen (this is neither the longest nor the most extreme):<br /><br /></div><span style="color:#000066;"><blockquote><span style="color:#000066;">I am not posting anymore!</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">I</span><span style="color:#000066;">'m going back to my peaceful life!</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">I am not a masochist at all!</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">But why should I run off with my tail beneath my<br />legs!</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">Everyone on here has enjoyed me being abused.Good for you.</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">It is sad - but that's what my life is, Rapunzel !!</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;"></span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">Bob, you are very disturbed to be stalking people by investigating them! I am not Jack the Ripper.</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;"></span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">But if you want to know - then read the book.</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">I also come from an abusive home so I know what I'm talking about!</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">Goodbye, I tried being nice, but I think you are all jealous of my intelligence, looks, personality and that I have solved this case.</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">So, I will bow out and you can talk about me behind my back</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">Have fun!!</span><br /></blockquote></span><br />Compare this to Bob's allegedly "pissed off" post (a direct reply to the above):<br /><br /><span style="color:#000066;"><blockquote><span style="color:#000066;">Karen </span><br /><span style="color:#000066;"></span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">What the hell are you talking about?</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;"></span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">You accuse people of being nasty to you. Really? I have a friend who lives in Regent St who thinks he knows you. I mention this in passing - the next thing you accuse me of trying to murder you!</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;"></span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">You mention in your post something about a smoke stack - in an attempt to lighten the mood I post a picture of it on the pages - you then accuse me of stalking you!</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;"></span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">I chip in with a bit of friendly advice about where to get some pictures for your book - you completely ignore it!</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;"></span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">Is it any wonder you are getting so much flack from people who apparently cannot do or say anything on these pages without you accusing them of being a stalker or a<br />murderer!</span><br /><span style="color:#000066;"></span><br /><span style="color:#000066;">I sincerely hope that this time you keep your word and do not appear on these pages again!</span></blockquote></span><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000000;">Karen's description of the climax strives to give the impression that she stayed calm and in control while Bob lost his cool. It's clear from the actual record of the exchange that the exact opposite happened. Bob maintained a calm, polite demeanor through much of the exchange while Karen threw several tantrums.</span><br /><br />Karen doubtless prefers the revisionist version of events, and of course the folks at "Exposing" will publish anything that makes their enemies look bad, regardless of facts. A marriage made in heaven, I'm sure you will agree.<br /><br />Stayed tuned for more installments of (re)Making History, coming soon...</div>Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-42150644400019530812006-08-17T23:59:00.000-07:002006-08-18T00:16:46.509-07:00How They Respond<div align="justify">One of the saddest aspects of the "Exposing" blog is it's tendency to lapse into racist, sexist or just plain ignorant comments, all the while claiming to have the moral high ground in the debate about "thugs". New examples appear almost every day, but we'll just show one for now.</div><br /><div align="justify">As a follow up to the phony "Nazi" accusations, someone posted a very reasonable comment on the "Exposing" blog:</div><br /><span style="color:#330099;"><blockquote><span style="color:#330099;">Was not the Red Baron a WW1 German fighter pilot who died in 1918, one year before even the pre-curser to the nazi party was formed?Is the poster using that profile pic German by any chance? Very racist of you to label all Germans as Nazis!!! I am sure German fathers and grandfathers fought and died in WW1 too.</span> </blockquote></span><br /><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000000;">Seems fairly straighforward to us: accurate, mildy chiding but in no way belligerent. An excellent opportunity for the "Exposing" crew to display some class and admit that they made an unfortunate mistake of both fact and expression. </span></div><br />So how did they respond? You be the judge:<br /><br /><span style="color:#000066;"><a name="c115367823347541541"></a><blockquote><span style="color:#000066;"><a class="comment-poster-name" onclick="" href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/27371673" rel="nofollow">shamingstephenryder</a><a class="comment-poster-name" onclick="" href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/27371673" rel="nofollow"> said... </span><br /><span style="color:#000066;"><br />German Baron fan:<br /><br />Shut up, you Nazi fuck. Stick your head into the toilet, and flush hard.<br />Send us your shoes to prove you've done it.<br /><br />11:10 AM<br /></span></blockquote></a></span><span style="color:#000066;"><br /></span><span style="color:#000066;"><br /><div align="justify"></span><span style="color:#000000;">Which I think you'll agree does little to contribute to an open and rational dialogue. </span>Remember, this is a blog that has the gall to call <em>others</em> bullies and thugs.</div>Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-7919462852851578352006-08-17T04:13:00.000-07:002006-08-17T04:14:24.596-07:00Whither Helen?<div align="justify"><span style="color:#000000;">Karen Trenouth, author of the Ripper classic "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders" posted this today on the "Exposing" blog:</span><br /><br /></div><span style="color:#000066;"><blockquote><span style="color:#000066;">Look what Dan Norder wrote on Amazon. Why does he keep insisting that I am Helen Pilon? I think that he has become delusional in his bearded age. Congratulations to Ms. Pilon for giving the most accurate review of Ripper Notes that I have seen to date.</span> </blockquote><div align="justify"></span><span style="color:#000000;">She may well wonder why Dan Norder keeps insisting that Karen is Helen Pilon--everyone else is wondering why Karen keeps insisting she's not.<br /><br />Let's take a look at the history of the enigmatic Ms Pilon, shall we?<br /><br />Shortly after Karen's book was published (suspiciously so) a glowing review of the book appeared on Amazon.ca, claiming to be from a Helen Pilon of Saskatchewan. It read:</span><br /><br /></div><span style="color:#000066;"><span style="color:#000066;"><blockquote><p><span style="color:#000066;"><span style="color:#000066;">Epiphany Of The Whitechapel Murders was a great read. I especially enjoyed the photographs and information on the murder victims. Trenouth's Jack the Ripper are a team of aristocrats who kill these prostitutes using ritual murder. I have told all of my friends and co-workers about this book and everyone can't wait to get their hands on a copy. This book is a must have!!</span> </span></span><br /></p></blockquote></span><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000000;"></span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000000;"></span></div><div align="justify"><span style="color:#000000;">Fair enough. A boffo review for a first time author, no one can complain about that. Things start to look a little fishy when one looks at Helen Pilon's Amazon profile. Prior to her rapturous review of "Epiphany", Helen Pilon had never posted a single review on Amazon.ca. It appears that Ms Pilon joined Amazon.ca specifically to praise Karen's book. What's more, since to this date Amazon.ca has not sold a <em>single</em> copy of "Epiphany", it follows that Ms Pilon must have purchased it elsewhere. On July 19, 2006 Helen Pilon was moved to offer a similarly impressive review of the book on the Amazon.co.uk site.<br /><br />And so matters rested until the (in)famous review by Bob (Boob) Hinton, which he posted on Amazon.com, amazon.ca, and Amazon.co.uk, among other places. Granted Bob's review is harsh, and we acknowledge that he and Karen have a rather turbulent history. Nonetheless Mr Hinton's is an honest and forthright review.<br /><br />Unfortunately Karen hasn't seen it that way, and has decided that the review is evidence of a highly orchestrated campaign against her book, most likely instigated by Dan Norder and Stephen Ryder. Surprisingly (or perhaps not) Ms Pilon appears to have read the review and felt the same way.<br /></span><br /><span style="color:#000000;"><em>One month after </em>having reviewed "Epiphany" and within a couple of days after Karen making her allegations of sabotage, Helen Pilon's glowing tributes to "Epiphany" appeared on Amazon.com and Amazon.co.uk--both on the <em>same day</em>.<br /><br />Lest there be any doubt that the real author of this reviews is most likely the author of the book herself, I point out four curious "coincidences" :</span><br /></div><ul><li><span style="color:#000000;">The reviews appeared shortly after Karen posted several tirades about "sabotage" of her book at Amazon's sites</span></li><li><span style="color:#000000;">At the same time as the positive reviews of Karen's book were posted, "Helen Pilon" posted highly negative reviews of publications by Stephen Ryder and Dan Order--the very people Karen believed to be orchestrating the "sabotage". (more about that another time)</span></li><li><span style="color:#000000;">The spelling, grammer, and syntax of Helen's reviews are suspiciously similar to Karen's--especially when Karen is upset or angry about something.</span></li><li><span style="color:#000000;">One of the reviews leaves no doubt as to the cause of this burst of activity, since "Helen" writes:</span> "<span style="color:#330099;">I don't understand what Robert Hinton from the UK is talking about, however, maybe he has not read the same book as I have. Some people can be vindictive when they have not wrote a book. Trust me, you will want to read this book</span>."</li></ul><p align="justify"><span style="color:#000000;">It is interesting to note that in her negative review of Dan Order's Ripper Notes, Karen...I mean Helen....says that Stephen Ryder's book is much better than Ripper Notes and she enjoyed it, but in the two reviews of Ryder's book elsewhere she says that she hated it. Make up your mind(s) please.</span></p><p align="justify"><span style="color:#000000;">The six rave reviews of "Epiphany" and harsh criticisms of Dan Norder and Stephen Ryder represent "Helen Pilon's" <strong>entire</strong> Amazon posting career to date. She appears to have said her piece and retired from the hectic world of literary review. Helen, we hardly know ye.</span></p><p align="justify"><span style="color:#000000;">Dan Norder claims in a rebuttal on Amazon that Karen has admitted that her married name is Pilon, however we have learned that this is not the case.</span></p><p align="justify"><span style="color:#000000;">Dan <em>has </em>confirmed that "Helen Pilon's" claim to be a former Ripper Notes subscriber is patently and provably false. Given Karen's constant tirades about "author sabotage and boycotting", and a demonstrated history of justifying childish behaviour by claiming she has the right to do to others what she believes they are doing to her, we would have to say that say Karen has a much stronger motive for the Amazon reviews than the enigmatic Ms Pilon.</span></p><p align="justify"><span style="color:#000000;">Expect a future story on the the Karen Trenouth/Bob Hinton feud, including Karen's rewriting of history regarding Bob's alleged "stalking" of her.</span></p><p></p>Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-3774751331360831632006-08-17T00:18:00.000-07:002006-08-17T01:23:22.135-07:00Argumentum ad Nazium<div align="justify">When in doubt, accuse your target of being a Nazi, a Nazi supporter, or a Nazi admirer, and the bunch over at "Exposing Ryder" made an impressive yet sloppy attempt of this on July 23, 2006.</div><br />The post started out claiming to be inspired by complaints from Jewish visitors to Stephen Ryder's <a href="http://www.casebook.org">website</a>:<br /><br /><em><span style="color:#000000;"><blockquote><em><span style="color:#000000;">Jewish readers have e-mailed us in a state of distress, asking us to demonstrate our indignance and disgust at the way photographs of infamous Nazi soldiers are being </span></em><a href="http://forum.casebook.org/member.php?u=1742"><em><span style="color:#000000;">displayed on Stephen Ryder's 'Jack the Ripper' casebook with their autographs emblazened. </span></em></a>.</blockquote></span></em><a href="http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger2/6817/427643272156365/1600/manfred_von_richtofen.jpg"><img style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger2/6817/427643272156365/320/manfred_von_richtofen.jpg" border="0" /></a><br /><div align="justify">The offending photo, from the profile of a casebook member, is duly displayed.</div><br /><div align="justify">Yet there are no Nazi symbols visible, and for good reason--the photo is of World War One flying ace the Baron von Richtofen, better known as "The Red Baron"</div><br /><div align="justify">Not only was he <em>not</em> a Nazi, he was killed 2 years before the Nazi party was formed. The Exposers can't even claim ignorance of the photograph's subject, <em>since it is clearly visible at the bottom of the photo</em>.</div><div align="justify"></div><br /><div align="justify">Having firmly jammed their collective foot in their mouth, a further accusation is made:</div><div align="justify"></div><em><em><blockquote><em><em>"We have been investigating this. A number of Casebook members are using Nazi identities as pseudonyms.</em>"</em></blockquote></em></em><div align="justify">Not a single example is provided, for the simple reason that the accusation is a complete and utter lie. Of the 1116 registered members of the Casebook message boards, there is not a <em>single</em> instance of a remotely Nazi-inspired pseudonym. If this is a sign of their investigative skills, Jack the Ripper must be laughing in his grave.</div><div align="justify"></div><br />To compound the defamation, the initial false claim is repeated, along with a healthy dose of inspired jingoism:<br /><br /><em><blockquote><em>"Displaying autographed Nazi photographs? Did our fathers, grandfathers and great grandfathers die for nothing? We are of course disgusted about this affront to human decency."</em></blockquote></em><div align="justify">Later, on the comment board, a commentator politely pointed out the error regarding the photo. Did Shamingstephenryder graciously concede the point and offer an apology? See for yourself:</div><br /><a name="c115489380235560888"></a><blockquote><span style="color:#000066;">"</span><a href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/27371673" rel="nofollow"><span style="color:#000066;">shamingstephenryder</span></a><span style="color:#000066;"> said... </span><br /><span style="color:#000066;"><br />Thankyou reader yes we have established that.<br />It makes his war like tendency no less significant, given the era, and flaunting his face is clearly a side kick macho gesture on the part of the ripperthugs. If you fail to understand that you could always go and castrate yourself, as we are getting a little tired of comments of this Nazi nature."</span></blockquote><p><span style="font-size:0;"></span></p><div align="justify">Talk about moving the goalposts. The <em>entire premise</em> of the article was to make the casebook members look like Nazi sympathizers, yet when the falsehood is pointed out, Shamingstephenryder tells his informant to castrate himself and calls him a Nazi (if you get the feeling that they like calling people Nazi's you are correct--there will be more examples at a later date). This is from a group that supposedly <em>opposes </em>thuggery.</div><div align="justify"></div><br />To close this off, let's post a comment that was sent to the "Exposing" blog but was never posted by the owners--a tactic they use frequently.<br /><br /><span style="color:#000066;"><span style="color:#000066;"><blockquote><span style="color:#000066;">Tuesday, August 15, 2006:<br /><br />Here's your article:<br /><br />"Jewish readers have e-mailed us in a state of distress, asking us to demonstrate our indignance and disgust at the way photographs of infamous Nazi soldiers are being displayed on Stephen Ryder's 'Jack the Ripper' casebook"<br /><br />When someone with a couple of active brain cells points out to you that the photo is NOT of a nazi soldier at all, you respond with:<br /><br />"flaunting his face is clearly a side kick macho gesture on the part of the ripperthugs. If you fail to understand that you could always go and castrate yourself, as we are getting a little tired of comments of this Nazi nature."<br /><br />Instead of admitting you were wrong, you viciously launch a personal attack the person who had the nerve to provide the correct information--in other words, you behaved in EXACTLY the way you accuse the ripperthugs of behaving.</span></blockquote><p></span><br /></p><p><span style="color:#000000;">I wonder why they didn't let this one through. I guess the truth hurts.</span></p><blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote></span>Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3503253685504948897.post-62992607590225589692006-08-16T23:33:00.000-07:002006-08-16T23:48:47.110-07:00Why are we here?<div align="justify">This blog is devoted to exposing the inconsistencies, evasions, harassment and outright falsehoods propagated by the "Exposing Stephen Ryder, Ivor Edwards, Tom Wescott and the 'Jack The Ripper Casebook' thugs" blog, with particular emphasis on the ongoing pattern of bizarre and frankly disturbing behavior by the author of "Epiphany of the Whitechapel Murders"--who seems to have found the perfect vehicle for expressing her frustrations and feelings of persecution.</div><div align="justify"><br />Hiding their viciousness behind anonymity and self-serving claims of satire, these online bullies perpetrate a ceaseless series of cowardly sniper attacks on just about anyone. The ultimate irony is that they justify these cheap-shots and unfounded accusations by labeling their targets as "thugs" and portraying themselves as victims-turned-advocates.</div><div align="justify"><br />Unsupported accusations, edited or deleted emails and posts, misattributions, intimidation, and bending the truth are used on a regular basis by these people. When that doesn't work, then name-calling, profanity and outright falsehood come into play.</div><div align="justify"><br />We aren't into cheap shots--you aren't going to be seeing a lot of snide comments about the size of someone's ass or the length of their hair or tackiness of their attire. No gratuitous accusations of sexual perversion, lack of hygiene or derogatory comparisons to any sort of animal. We'll leave that to Shamingstephenryder's multiple personalities.<br /><br />We are here to present the other side of the story, as rationally as possible, using examples from their blog, accounts of their behavior, and their own posts from casebook.org, jtrforums.com and jtrforums.co.uk, among others.<br /><br />If you have stories, anecdotes, or other contributions, feel free to email them to us. Although we will not post your name on this blog, we will NOT post unverified accounts from anyone who does not identify themselves in the email. You can of course leave anonymous comments--be prepared for a short delay as they are vetted before posting. We respect your privacy (we've seen what the bullies can and will do to those who point out their double standards) but we will not be a party to spreading slander or malicious gossip--we leave that to the other guys. </div>Nemohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03050665562758715680noreply@blogger.com0