Tag Archive: defamation


Every Quote Ever Uttered By Anyone Exonerates Michael E Mann

 

Cartoon by Josh

 

” The cartoon at right is by Josh via Watts Up With That. Sadly, Josh seems unaware that, per the letter from Michael E Mann’s lawyer Peter J Fontaine (appended as the final page to my Answer to Mann’s Amended Complaint), unauthorized use of Dr Mann’s facial features “infringes on various copyrights” that Dr Mann has taken out on his nose, eyeballs, ear lobes, etc. If you must engage in caricature, draw a cartoon of Hillary Clinton, Justin Bieber or one of the other seven billion people on the planet whose visage does not enjoy the unique protection under US law that Dr Mann’s does. It is not clear from Counselor Fontaine’s letter whether the bare-chestedness of Josh’s cartoon additionally “infringes on various copyrights” in Dr Mann’s nipples, but that seems the way to bet.

  The title of the picture – “Mann of Rigor” – alludes to the Nobel fantasist’s equally fantastic claims to have been “exonerated” by four separate British investigations. Having demolished the UK end of Mann’s false assertions, the invaluable Steve McIntyre now moves on to the US inquiries, starting with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office of the Inspector General’s report. The NOAA comes under the Department of Commerce, and, in the “Dr Mann is Exonerated” section of Mann’s court pleading, is referenced on page 26:

  In the course of its inquiry, the department examined all of the CRU e-mails, including the November 16, 1999 e-mail referenced above in which Professor Jones used the words “trick” and “hide the decline.”52 The department found “no evidence” of inappropriate manipulation of data.53

As Steve McIntyre demonstrates, almost every word of the above paragraph is false:”

 

Continue reading Mr Steyn’s post .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

How Covert Agents Infiltrate The Internet To Manipulate, Deceive, And Destroy Reputations

 

 

 

 

” One of the many pressing stories that remains to be told from the Snowden archive is how western intelligence agencies are attempting to manipulate and control online discourse with extreme tactics of deception and reputation-destruction. It’s time to tell a chunk of that story, complete with the relevant documents.

  Over the last several weeks, I worked with NBC News to publish a series of articles about “dirty trick” tactics used by GCHQ’s previously secret unit, JTRIG (Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group). These were based on four classified GCHQ documents presented to the NSA and the other three partners in the English-speaking “Five Eyes” alliance. Today, we at the Intercept are publishing another new JTRIG document, in full, entitled “The Art of Deception: Training for Online Covert Operations.”

  By publishing these stories one by one, our NBC reporting highlighted some of the key, discrete revelations: the monitoring of YouTube and Blogger, the targeting of Anonymous with the very same DDoS attacks they accuse “hacktivists” of using, the use of “honey traps” (luring people into compromising situations using sex) and destructive viruses. But, here, I want to focus and elaborate on the overarching point revealed by all of these documents: namely, that these agencies are attempting to control, infiltrate, manipulate, and warp online discourse, and in doing so, are compromising the integrity of the internet itself.

  Among the core self-identified purposes of JTRIG are two tactics: (1) to inject all sorts of false material onto the internet in order to destroy the reputation of its targets; and (2) to use social sciences and other techniques to manipulate online discourse and activism to generate outcomes it considers desirable. To see how extremist these programs are, just consider the tactics they boast of using to achieve those ends: “false flag operations” (posting material to the internet and falsely attributing it to someone else), fake victim blog posts (pretending to be a victim of the individual whose reputation they want to destroy), and posting “negative information” on various forums. Here is one illustrative list of tactics from the latest GCHQ document we’re publishing today:”

 

 

 

 

” We submitted numerous questions to GCHQ, including: (1) Does GCHQ in fact engage in “false flag operations” where material is posted to the Internet and falsely attributed to someone else?; (2) Does GCHQ engage in efforts to influence or manipulate political discourse online?; and (3) Does GCHQ’s mandate include targeting common criminals (such as boiler room operators), or only foreign threats?

  As usual, they ignored those questions and opted instead to send their vague and nonresponsive boilerplate: “It is a longstanding policy that we do not comment on intelligence matters. “

 

 

   This Glenn Greenwald piece is a must read for all that have any interaction with the internet . Yes , this means you . We’re all targets now . No one is safe from attempts to destroy dissent facilitated with our own tax dollars and conducted by our own government .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nevada Family Says Police Occupation of Homes Violated the Third Amendment

 

” You don’t often hear about lawsuits based on the Third Amendment, the one that says “no soldier shall in time of peace be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war but in a manner to be prescribed by law.” That usually overlooked provision is cited in a federal lawsuit recently filed by Anthony Mitchell and his parents, Michael and Linda Mitchell—an oddity for which we can thank the Henderson, Nevada, police department.

The Mitchells, who live in separate houses near each other in the Las Vegas suburb, were forcibly evicted from their homes on July 10, 2011, by police officers responding to a domestic violence report involving one of their neighbors. Here is how it all started, according to the complaint:”