Image and video hosting by TinyPic














Tuesday, August 12, 2008

Is this the last Techdude post? I hope so, but probably not.

(Forgive a lengthy recap of our story, but some folks may have walked into the movie late.)

A minority of the PUMA movement fixates on the tale of Techdude, the alleged courtroom-quality expert in image analysis who says that he can "prove" that Barack Obama's Certificate of Live Birth (COLB, for short) is phony. The dude insists that a forger used a real COLB -- issued to Obama's sister, no less -- as the basis for the fake. Moreover, the dude says that he can, with a little techno-magic, resurrect the original COLB information.

Previous articles published on this site (scroll down) and elsewhere have proven pretty much beyond doubt that these claims are crap. No-one has replicated Techdude's work. (Yes, a couple of people have claimed to do so, but they've offered no proof -- and they have published under nicknames, which means that the dude may be "verifying" himself.) No-one who uses Photoshop professionally considers Techdude's argument comprehensible. Although he has presented many jpg files to the public, none of them show the actual results of his work -- that is to say, none of them show Maya Sotero's name on the COLB.

The dude has promised to clear up all mysteries with a much-anticipated report. It has yet to appear.

He and his zombie followers attack the character of anyone who dares to express doubt. Many of the most vicious attacks were directed at yours truly.

No amount of ad hominem argumentation can change facts: If a forger covers up type with a chunk of background pattern -- that, my friends, is it. Those old pixels are gone forever. You can play with Photoshop or some other imaging app. You can use every damned toy in the Batcave. But you will not tease the original text back into legibility. You may uncover evidence that a cut-n-paste job took place, but Photoshop won't give you a crowbar capable of prying up the concrete flooring to see what lies beneath.

In short, Techdude flummoxed the technically illiterate with pseudoscience and a hyper-macho 'tude. What really wowed 'em was his claimed resume. Any critic of the dude's work would invariably have that resume waved in his or her face, as though that settled that.

But without a real name, what did a resume matter? Anyone who has seen the film Catch Me If You Can knows that imposters can be very, very clever.

Eventually, simple googling revealed that Techdude's c.v. precisely matched that of one Adam Fink, the owner and "chief investigator" of a firm in Missouri called Collectech, a.k.a Missouri Forensics. Dr. Neal Krawetz -- a genuine expert who operates under his real name -- originally accused Fink of being Techdude, an identification which could imperil Fink's ability to offer expert testimony in court. Later, Krawetz spoke to Fink by phone, and came away convinced that the two men are not one and the same.

Trusting Krawetz' judgment, I wrote a post accusing Techdude of identity theft.

(Here endeth the recap.)

Here's the new stuff: The chief promoter of Techdude's work -- a blogger operating under the name of Texas Darlin -- has more or less admitted that, in her opinion, Fink is our dude.

A foreign journalist tells me that another devotee of the dude, Pamela Geller (a right-wing broadcaster who runs a pro-Israel site called Atlas Shrugged) also believes that Fink is the man, although Geller has not, to my knowledge, mentioned Fink in public. Geller continues to accept the dude at his every dubious word.

I have little more to say about Geller -- beyond noting that, politically, she and I will always see eye to toe. (We share a mutual dislike of Obama, but that's about it.) We'll get to Texas Darlin' in a bit. Right now, let's deal with Fink.

I've called Fink and left a polite request for a brief interview, as per Texas Darlin's suggestion. No response. Suspicious behavior, that.

Even more suspicious: The dude, instead of issuing his report, has backed away from the controversy, citing threats to his family:
My family is now being harassed and threatened. She [his wife] is absolutely terrified and is afraid to leave the house or even go to work. She is begging me to stop and I am going to listen to her. I cannot endanger my family any further.
Texas Darlin has responded with a tentative "No Sale" sign:
All information that we have received from Techdude has been published. We have not seen the rest of his evidence. At present, he is unavailable. Should he not respond promptly, we will remove his statements and findings.
Good for her. That stance is a lot more responsible than Geller's stand-by-your man approach.

These alleged attacks on Techdude's wife seem awfully convenient. Now he has an excuse to go into hiding instead of facing the growing demand to back up his BS.

This isn't the first time he has claimed real-life harassment. A few weeks back -- well before the controversy reached the flash point -- the dude asserted that his tires had been slashed, and that someone left a dead rabbit by his door. Obviously, he wants us to believe that the Obama forces are out to get him. Using rabbits.

These melodramatic assertions force us to ask a few obvious questions.

1. If the Obots already know his address, then why continue to operate under a pseudonym? Under the circumstances, transparency would seem the safest course.

2. How did the bad guys find out the truth long before anyone else did?

3. If the bad guys already know Techdude's secret identity, why don't they publish it?

If the Penguin ever finds out that Bruce Wayne is Batman, he won't keep the news under his top hat. And he won't leave a bunny at the gate of Wayne Manor. (The Joker might, but he's wacky.)

One Techdude, or two? I would like to propose another possibility. Mind you, this is just a possibility -- I do not have proof, and I remain very open to counter-arguments.

A reader whom I will call G has directed my attention to a series of comments on the neo-Nazi site Stormfront. (See, for example, here.) Apparently, someone calling himself "Techdude" likes to hang out with the aficionados of Adolf.

Are the two Techdudes one and the same?

On Pamela Geller's site, the COLB-huntin' Techdude was asked this very question, and issued a denial.

G (a scientist at the Universtiy of Wisconsin, and an Obama opponent) questions this denial. He has been studying up on the various techniques of discovering literary "fingerprints." Applying both common sense and computer analysis, he has noted a striking similarity between the writing styles of the two Techdudes
They share a very distinctive style of punctuation. There's a heavy use of dashes to set off comments or parse sentences. And there's a paucity of commas. There's also a fairly heavy use of parentheses. According to what I've recently read in the authorship identification literature, punctuation has turned out to be one of the most informative and reliable features.
Both Techdudes like to use ALL CAPS for emphasis. Both Techdudes like to use emoticons. Both use the phrase "3rd party" instead of the more common "third party."
I computed the mean word length (this is considered to be a somewhat informative feature for author identification) for writing samples from a large number of authors. The mean word lengths all tended to fall in a narrow range. The Texas Darlin 'Techdude' and the Stormfront 'Techdude' both have a lower than average word size, and are similar to each other - 4.61 characters for the TexasDarlin samples, and 4.63 characters for the Stormfront samples. The samples from other authors fell into the range of 4.76-5.64 characters (mean of 5.12, standard deviation of 0.27). So the two 'Techdude' samples fell outside the range of the other authors I sampled, and resembled each other.
Granted, this sort of analysis has limits. Similar arguments have been used to identify Christopher Marlowe as Shakespeare, and Marlowe did not write the Shakespeare plays. I myself have a weakness for dashes and (on occasion) ALL CAPS, although I despise emoticons.

Nevertheless...

Anyone with any literary tendencies will develop an instinct for recognizing writing styles. If provided a large sample, you probably would not need a byline to spot the work of your favorite author. My gut tells me that the Stormfront Techdude and the Texas Darlin' Techdude may be one and the same, despite the denial.

Intriguingly, the Stormfront author has supported the use of subterfuge to infiltrate non-racist sites. G says that the following is a quote from the Stormfront Techdude (alas, I don't have a URL):
'I think the best way to draw people to SF (as many do not even know what SF is) and not get banned is to pose as an extreme anti-racist. Act as if you're offended by everything even remotely racially aware, and tell the person that "with your attitude you should be posting with the racists on stormfront.org'.
Someone who thinks that way might consider himself very clever if he managed to fool vehemently pro-Israel blog-owners such as Pamela Geller and Larry Johnson.

Obviously, this argument gets us into a very tricky (and potentially actionable) area. So let's be clear: I am not stating that Mr. Fink is a racist -- in fact, I will presume the opposite. Neither am I stating that Fink is the dude; I will presume the opposite.

I'm simply asking my readers to compare the writing styles and come to their own conclusions. Are G's suspicions silly or supportable?

As for Texas Darlin': I must admit that I became genuinely ticked off at her obstinacy. For a while, I was convinced that she was in on the con. The only alternative, frankly, was to presume that she possesses truly startling reserves of naivete.

Her recent post on No Quarter has largely quelled those suspicions. The producer of an upcoming PUMA documentary, who has spoken to Texas Darlin' on the telephone, assures me that the woman appears to be on the up-and-up -- although the lady from Texas adamantly refuses to divulge any information about herself. (Behind the scenes, when talking to each other, most bloggers tend to operate on a "real name" basis. That's a tendency, not an invariability.)

Intriguing mysteries remain.

Freeper or Hill-girl? Texas Darlin' insists that she is a "pro-Hillary blogger and lifelong Democrat." However, one Steve Diamond on No Quarter says:
I’ve known Texas Darlin’ for several years dating back to when she was posting on FreeRepublic and I can vouch for her credibility and trustworthiness.
The notoriously reactionary Free Republic site is not friendly territory for Democrats or Clinton supporters.

A mystery number. John Dean, an occasional reader of this site and former contributor to No Quarter, loves to track down IP addresses. He thinks that he has Texas Darlin's number.

To be specific: 72.197.138.2

This is not private information. That IP number shows up in the header of a message sent by Texas Darlin' on April 2, 2008, at 10:27 PM, to a Yahoo Group -- hillarysvoice@yahoogroups.com. It's one of several numbers on the "X-Recieved" list, which traces the path from a home computer to its destination. That number traces to a coastal town in California (I won't be more specific); in her Yahoo group message, Texas Darlin' reveals that she has moved from Texas to California.

The same number is listed here as belonging to -- hold onto your hats! -- Larry Sinclair. As most of you know, Larry is the strange and unconvincing man who insists that he had gay sex with Barack Obama. I've poked fun at Larry in the past.

A caveat about the link given above: It goes to a bizarre and rather distasteful site called "The Mitch and Nan Show," which is apparently devoted to attacking Larry Sinclair. Frankly, Larry's enemies strike me as zealous and over-the-top and downright creepy.

Sort of like Larry himself.

Be that as it may, Texas Darlin' was not on Mitch and Nan's radar. And an IP number is an IP number is an IP number.

Obviously, Larry is not Texas Darlin'. The afore-mentioned producer assures me that Texas Darlin' is female. I understand that Larry does not live in California.

All of which leaves me very confused.

Could there be an innocent explanation for this numerical congruence? Very possibly. I'm hardly an expert at tracking IP addresses, and I'd appreciate correction by someone who is an expert. Texas Darlin' deserves the benefit of the doubt.

I probably should not mention this next bit in public. But...in for a penny, in for a pound.

Texas Darlin' has apparently referred to herself by the nickname "Gigi," among other psuedonyms. (I presume that "Gigi" is not her real name.) Back in 2002, a Gigi from Texas posted comments at -- you guessed it -- Stormfront.

Coincidence? Very probably. (If nothing else, the Stormfront Gigi proves that some "leetle girls" do not grow up "in ze most delightful way.")

Bottom line: Let me stress again that Texas Darlin' deserves the benefit of every possible doubt. I feel certain that someone out there will offer a reasonable explanation for the IP coincidence.

I must register a harsher judgment of Techdude. He may or may not be Mr. Fink. But he is certainly a fink.

Now zoom back for the larger picture. This COLB controversy illustrates a problem besetting the PUMA movement: The prattlings of fringe-dwellers threaten to overwhelm the more reasonable arguments against Barack Obama.

Like it or not, PUMAs must confront the "strange bedfellows" phenonemon. Many Dems dislike Obama. Most reactionaries also dislike Obama. Often, the two groups dislike Obama for reasons which cannot be reconciled.

For example, Republicans routinely call Obama a "socialist" -- an inane charge. By contrast, I consider Obama's main economic advisers, especially Austan Goolsbee, far too libertarian.

A long time ago, I learned that hard-core conservatives tend to love, love, love weird conspiracy theories and pseudoscience. They go in for strange tales about flying saucers, Rife microscopes, Tesla death rays, the Philadelphia Experiment, the Illuminati, Satanic Ritual Abuse and god knows what else. Naturally, in this election cycle, such people are drawn toward "out there" theories-of-Obama involving gay sex or fake documents or secret trips to Kenya.

You won't find any of that crap on a site like the Confluence. The writings of Riverdaughter and Katiebird are witty, sophisticated and well-reasoned. But the broader anti-Obama movement does contain some very strange individuals peddling some very strange memes.

I hate to say it, but those oddballs are gaining a voice on Larry Johnson's No Quarter. Although I still visit his site often, some of his material makes me cringe. Many of his readers are just as oafish as the Kossacks.

The PUMA movement represents a split within the Democratic party. The movement itself may split. Our very name shouts disunity.

PS: Looks like Techdude won't take me up on my "hidden Shakespeare quote" challenge. Let's see if you can guess the play (though not the line) based on this clue:

Twain - Tchaikovsky - Shaw - Voltaire - Brecht - Bresson

It's the nastiest line Willie ever wrote. A solution will arrive soon.
Comments:
Henry VI, part 1?
Joan as the common denominator

But for nastiest, I'd be inclined to Othello or somewhere in the tragedies.

Anyway, I respect your rigor in research of this matter and your fine writing. Thanks for being you.
 
It's fairly obvious...

Larry Johnson = shit-stirrer with shady gov't employment history who has so far foisted the Sinclair, 'Whitey' & COLB hoaxes on the public.

The TechDud & TexDud (if they are 2 people) probably have similar employment histories. Their Stormfront duties were likely just part of that, as is their current successful efforts at making PUMA look like fools.

Personally, I think McCain & Obama are both CFR tools. This whole fiasco smells of discount COINTELPRO.
 
Mary didn't smoke marijuana, she was the plant. Only female plants produce THC. Want the most THC from a female plant? Keep it away from male plants (so that it's a 'virgin').

More here:
http://www.gnosticmedia.com/pharmacraticinquisition.html
 
anon 5:47, I don't believe what you say about Larry Johnson. That theory -- if it can be called a theory -- doesn't make any sense at all.

I do think that he has been gullible and un-selective.

anon 6:03 -- I have to thank you for this:

"Mary didn't smoke marijuana, she was the plant."

That may be the strangest sentence ever to appear on this blog.

Have you seen "Inland Empire"? You'd dig it.
 
I will join the accolades for your rigor and vigor in this interesting analysis of the birth certificate imbroglio (is he or is he not an all american boy?)
Personally I wonder if any of us are truly All American. I see too many panty waists out there too locked in to their "see no evil" lifestyles, and their addictions to the soft couches and sugar coated nauseous fast foods news, and not nearly enough howls and stamping feet, (like Cindy has) for Justice and "off with their heads" passions, at the now critical, collective dash for the emergency room, that we are all headed for (in an ambulance that is almost out of gas)
One suggestion though. Spend more virtual ink on the surgery we need for a return to mental and physical health because the body politic is in a coma and is wallowing deep doo doo and may expire, unless help arrives in time.
Obama with all his frailties and shortcomings is the only candidate to date that can rally the rabble and the troops and the firemen (and women now) to face the horrible blaze that the armies of the night that have ignited all around U.S.
 
Ye Gods! What a tangled web!
Here's the thing though - unless I've become so muddle-headed as to miss the point:

Even if all your suspicions are true and Techdude and maybe Texas Darlin are really Republican sympathisers, in league with Atlas Shrugs and Stormfront, isn't their aim broadly the same as PUMA's?
i.e. To prevent Obama from being the next POTUS?

PUMA's reasons focus on replacing Obama with H. Clinton, the other faction want McCain in power, but the route to both is the same.

So, what would be the point in TD and TD misleading readers ? To discredit PUMA ? How so? They'd also discredit their own right wing efforts.

I think that any and every avenue should be explored, however "fringe" or weird it may seem to people like yourself.
From one of these "fringe" efforts may come the very thing to bring about what you have said is your dearest wish - to avoid having a President Obama.

It's sad to see yet another split in the left wing widening day by day. If you don't agree with what Texas Darlin' or Larry Johnson posts, then don't read it, do your own thing. If you "build a better mousetrap" people will come.
 
Gee Joseph, you didn't mind tarring all Obama supporters with the same brush, using the most vile and ignorant postings from the zealots to do so.

Now, you're uncomfortable because the most zealous wackjobs in the PUMA "movement" are reflecting badly on other Obama opponents?

How does it feel to be unfairly judged by the company you DON'T keep? Well, now you know how we've felt, subjected to your cringe-worthy pronouncements about us based solely upon the lunatic utterings of those with whom we wouldn't share a cup of tea. [This, from an Edwards guy, much like yourself...]

The problem with blind hatred is that it leaves you seeing only what you wish, blind to other possibilities.

As an artist, you know that a broad brush doesn't do justice to details, and that details DO matter.
 
Bullshit, CJFKG.

All...

ALL ALL ALL...

ALL Obama supporters were and are vile toward the Hillary voters. Not "some." Don't you dare say "some" because the evidence is there in the DU and Kos archives.

ALL.

For six months. Without exception. Daily. Hourly. Pure paranoia and hatred.

And it is still going on -- did you see the latest from "Josh Marshall" (or whoever is using her name) on the Penn "revelations" -- acusing Hillary (HILLARY!) of mounting a smear campaign?

I'll use the metaphor again: That's like saying Poland attacked Germany in 1939.

The shit never stops!
 
Careful JFK Guy,

Joseph is doing what many of us are aggreived that the blogosphere and the media didn't do in the first place in this primary - operate as a reality based community. Over at Kos, and on tv and in caucuses, Clinton and Clinton supporters have been attacked with really vile rhetoric and no one from the Obama camp EVER attempted to put a stop to it. Did you hear a peep out of Obama about Randi Rhodes attacks on Clinton for a group of Obama supporters? No, you did not. If anything has ever proved beyond a shadow of a doubt Obama's extreme moral shortcomings for the office of the presidency, that's it right there. He lost my vote for all time when he didn't distance himself from that.

Joseph is putting a stop to vile anti-Obama rhetoric. I'm the producer of the PUMA documentary and I'm the one who dug up the contemporaneous announcement in the Honolulu Advertiser of Obama's birth. When I posted a short post on The Confluence about HillBuzz's summary of what was in the whitey tape, I was immediately cautioned to distance myself from that story (not that I was a believer in it in the first place - the word "whitey" rings false to me).

This is the difference between the PUMAsphere and the Obama camp. None of this stuff happened on Clinton's behalf. None of it.
 
"ALL ALL ALL"

Oh really! I have followed your anti-Obama rants for months. I often clicked on your links and verified your quotes. You know what I found? Your quotes were accurate but I found many more "sensible" quotes, quotes criticising the nutjobs, people who pointed out the need for unity in the Fall.
 
I am a member of the Hillary's Voice group, (where this IP is said to have come from) but I was unable to confirm the IP you posted very publicly here, Joseph. If the IP address is Texas Darlin's, then a reasonable explanation is that Texas Darlin (TD) posted a comment under the name "Larry Sinclair". I believe TD to be female based on my online interactions with "her" and a blog talk radio interview of a woman identifying herself as Texas Darlin.

Joseph, I am disappointed in your pursuit of outing TD's RL life info. I want to stress to you again -- please stop. I appreciate the fact you want to protect the PUMA movement. I, too, feel strongly about PUMA being a movement of Democrats and not wanting PUMA associated with any unsavory people or groups. I support you on this. I simple ask that you use restraint. TD is someone's daughter, someone's loved one. By posting her info, you put her in danger.

As I have commented to you previously, I have known TD to be a strong Hillary supporter that took a stand during the primary wars at the Daily Kos and MyDD along with Alegre and our Hillary's Voice group. I do not know TD personally, but I'll vouch for her as a Hillary supporter for the past 6 months. I don't always agree with who or what she publishes on her own blog. I don't always agree with Riverdaughter or Alegre either, but I still stand by them as citizen journalists.

I believe that TD was very invested in the COLB and dual citizenship story and wanted to get to the truth (no matter what). Was she over zealous in her pursuit? Possibly. I believe her heart was in the right place though. I don't know about Techdude or JB.

As to your speculation that TD might be associated with a racist group, well that is troubling. This is a very serious charge, Joseph. You need to prove it or else you are propagating in the nastiest of smears.

Regardless, I stand by my calls for you to cease any attempts to out TDs RL info. Investigate her, but there is no need to publish any of her RL info (including her IP or state). I ask that you remove reference to them from your site.
 
IP address are of very limited use for trying to identify someone.

Unless one has a static IP address, about all you can do is pin it down to a particular geographic location.

The vast majority of people have dynamic IP addresses. Which means that the IP address will change whenever they establish a connection with the network.

For example, whenever I reset my DSL modem, I get assigned a different IP address than I'd been assigned previously. So at best, you could only trace me to dsl.scrm01.pacbell.net, and I would be just one of thousands if not tens of thousands of people.

k
 
I did not publish Texas Darlin's real life info. I would not publish it if I knew it.

You don't understand how IP adresses work. They point to Internet Service Providers -- or to the servers they use -- not to individual users. Her identity thus remains safe.

At best, the number traces to a city or county. I didn't share the name of the city.

And yet you talk as though I stripped the poor lady bare!

I got the IP number from a public source, not from a private email. If you are on the group, you can retrieve it yourself, if you know how.

As for this "get with the program" shit -- I just now had it out with SusanUnPC of No Quarter, a site I will immediately remove from my blogroll. (Not that will matter to Larry Johnson. Call it a symbolic gesture.)

For what it is worth, Krawetz says that Texas Darlin and Susan have used the same email address. They may be one and the same. Apparently, another writer named Harriet Christian has used the name. Texas Darlin used a number of different names on those Yahoo groups.

YOU say that Texas Darlin has sent mail using Larry Sinclair's name.

And now SusanUnPC is saying that Steve Diamond's indiscreet comment on No Quarter was the work of an imposter. What a strange world these people inhabit -- a world of multiple nicks and communal email addresses!

Odd. In the same thread, Diamond "the imposter" rattles on about his impressive background, in detailed terms that no imposter would use. John Dean's comment was quickly deleted from that thread, but the "imposter's" comment was not.

You know, I am getting royally sick of these antics. People using nicks. Pretending to be other people.

Something really strange is going on here. I don't yet quite know what it is. But the No Quarter crowd is playing a funny game, and I don't like it.

I'll say this: The PUMAs are starting to piss me off as much as the Kossacks did and do.
 
The previous comment was meant for grlpatriot, not koyaan.

Koyaan: Precisely. If the IP addressed traced back to Tex Dar's individual computer, I would not have published it.

At best, it traces to a city or county in California.

Odd, though, that Larry Sinclair would send mail from that IP. I can't exaplain that -- unless (as grlpatriot suggests) TexDar pretended to be Larry Sinclair.

This is getting weird.
 
I think I might be on your auto delete list but I will try again. I know I am on Jen's shit list. ( Whoever she is?)
I find your expose of all this CB intrigue really interesting. Can't wait to see where it all leads. Thanks.
 
Thanks, Joseph. Although I never bought into the BC stuff, I admit I was intrigued and started to believe when the "smoking gun" story had been posted, but I quickly became suspicious when I was following the "breaking" story on NQ when you were asking technical questions and all you got was insults but no answers from this "scientist." I find it interesting that TD took down all of the "technical" info, but he/she is still following the same theory.

I agree with you that there are plenty of valid reasons not to support BO without engaging in conspiracy theories.

BTW, many cons just want to feel important and will go to extremes for that high.
 
"More matter, with less art." Hamlet

It's not nasty enough. Hmm.

Second guess, Julius Caesar.
 
Joseph, I agree that the Confluence doesn't go into this stuff, which is good. But they do link to NQ, appear on NQ podcasts, and remain coalition members with NQ. Frankly, their pleas of innocence aren't very convincing. As far as I can tell, you and Blue Lyon are the only PUMA bloggers that seem to give a crap about this shit, so kudos to you guys.

grlpatriot, TD isn't a citizen-journalist, she's a smear merchant who clearly has a problem with dark-skinned people. Say I posted on my blog without any evidence that "grlpatriot is a meth addict" and then held that as true until someone proved me wrong. When someone did prove me wrong, I retaliate with "she's still a convicted child molester", again without any evidence. It would (rightly) piss you off and would be logically untenable to boot. This is exactly what TD does on a daily basis.
 
Joseph -

Um... if you don't know how IP addresses work, then how did you know TD's didn't point back to her own computer? (I haven't checked where the IP in question maps.)

Depending upon the ISP and account type, IP addresses can be static or dynamic; the former remain associated with a specific device (usually an endpoint router) for the duration of the contract, much like a land-line phone number. Dynamic IPs are assigned by the network on an as-needed basis and as such maybe assigned to multiple people over the course of a year. (That said, I've had the same dynamically allocated IP address for at least the past 6 months...)

As far as mapping from IP to strett address, that's virtually impossible, even in the case of static IPs. However, it can be easier to suss out real names of pseudo- or anonymous posters who come from static IPs, simply because the longer they work from unchanging addresses, the greater the likelihood of there being posts, emails, or whatnot in their real names available online somewhere....

Bottom line, if you aren't certain of the type of IP *and* you truly wish to help to preserve the user's privacy, don't publish the IP.

Maz
 
Mazoola, I've never been able to trace an IP to an actual person, even when I get death threats. Only the ISP can give up that information, and they won't.

I took the IP from a public source, not a private email.

And if I had not used the actual IP address, thereby giving people the chance to double check my work, you know DAMNED well people would have accused me of making things up when I said that the same IP address was used by Larry Sinclair (or someone posing as him).

I think the Confluence will link to No Quarter for some time to come, but trust me -- lots of folks in PUMA land are getting ticked off at Larry Johnson.

Just now, I had a miserable exchange with SusanUNPC -- who may or may not be Texas Darlin herself. She accused ME of lacking ethics, because I did not write to Texas Darlin'. Well, how could I? She does not list any contact info on her site. I presume she does not want mail from the likes of me.

It pissed me off to have my ethics assailed by a sensationalist who published PURE CRAP on No Quarter -- without making ANY attempt to check it out!

And these NQ feebs dare to assail MY ethics? Da noive!

The rabble who comment on that site are every bit as bad as the thugs we all saw on Kos. My god, they are STILL defending Techdude. Yet they don't even understand what the hell he was saying. One of those nitwits is actually burbling something about using chemicals to erase the type from Maya's COLB...!

They're just pissed off because they were snookered by a con man. And they won't admit that they were snookered. In that regard, they are no different from the Kos Kooks who got married and stayed married to the "darkened video" smear.

By the way, gary is the one who guessed the right play. I'm a Johannaphile from way back.
 
Joe, all sorts of hocus pocus tricks going on now.

There is no evidence that TexasDarlin sent email(s) using Larry Sinclair's name.

When SusanUnPC asks someone if it is OK to publish their post on the front page, she creates an account (if new) and puts her email address down temporarily. Susan is not TexasDarlin. Nobody should try to make anything out of this - when I was first frontpaged there, it showed my email as Susan's. I contacted her, she explained why, and then she fixed it.

John
 
"There is no evidence that TexasDarlin sent email(s) using Larry Sinclair's name."

Well, the IP address is evidence of SOMETHING.

I am glad to have an explanation for the email address business. The way I figure it, if Texas Darlin' wanted mail, she would have put her addy on her masthead, as I do.
 
I agree - the IP is evidence of something...in this case, that she posted regularly at Sinclair's site as Gigi. I've got some of the posts, as do you now.

Beyond that, I'm just not sure - I don't know why "Mitch and Nan" posted her IP below Sinclair's name.

The IP, all of the lies, pushing bogus research, various sockpuppets, the apparent fact that she is a Freeper - that's an awful lot of smoke for someone who wants others to believe she is honest and honorable.

John
 
Excellent sleuthing, Joe. I'll never understand this birth certificate thing, but it's certainly another tribute to The Weirdness That Is Obama. And politics in general.

In case TechDude can't solve your Shakespeare riddle--these words of Lady Macbeth strike me as the most terrifying in Shakespeare:

I have given suck, and know
How tender 'tis to love the babe that milks me:
I would, while it was smiling in my face,
Have pluck'd my nipple from his boneless gums,
And dash'd the brains out, had I so sworn as you
Have done to this.


Whoa! Did you think of an even scarier line? Yours fearfully...
 
Since TD is shutting down any opposition, here's proof that her other "expert", Mr. Judah is either lazy or a malicious liar. He makes a point of the court records of Obama's parents being unusual. But in two minutes I found another court case with the exact same characteristics. I doubt that the Joneses are as "exotic" as Obama's parents and yet the details are remarkably the same. Perhaps they too are part of the conspiracy.

Case #: 1DV00-0-118872
Case Title: JAMES L JONES VS ELOISE JONES
Initiation Date: 11-28-1980
Case Termination Date: 11-19-1988
 
"ALL Obama supporters were and are vile toward the Hillary voters."

This is the kind of statement that qualify your for psychiatric treatment... Any voices in your head telling you to do stuff ?
 
joe, AA here.

I give it ten days before it all unravels and people like you start to question even the foundations of your obamaphobia and its origins.

It is becoming clear Susan has never been a progressive 'truth teller'. She has been a cia stooge from day one in her reporting on Sudan.

Watching her, the progressive humanitarian, parrot PNAC tripe about Russia peels another layer back.

Go read the Atlantic piece if you haven't already and look at what the campaign really thought about the issues the PUMA people claim as thuggery, theft, intimidation.

Even you who claims to only want the truth are calling Obama a racist.

Even you have bought into the xenophobic nationalistic tripe.

Even you have bought into the 'insert white where you read black, and tell me it's not racist' crap.

Black Liberation Theology is NOT racist.

Telling black elected super delegates they may face backlash in their communities for not supporting Barack is not racist.

It may be political arm twisting, but if you had a problem with that you would have written a 2000 word denunciation of the attacks on Bill Richardson for voting they way he wanted to vote.

But alas you didn't. You instead have a picture of Obama and Jackson calling them racists.

Practice what you preach.
 
"ALL Obama supporters were and are vile toward the Hillary voters. Not "some." Don't you dare say "some" because the evidence is there in the DU and Kos archives.

ALL.

For six months. Without exception. Daily. Hourly. Pure paranoia and hatred."


Endless iteration of an error doesn't make it true, Joseph. DU and Kos archives no doubt include a bunch of wince-inducing crap, as you've demonstrated.

But your supposistion is that "all" Obama supporters are members of the above-cited sites. They are not, which may explain why some of Obama's supporters haven't been more vocal in denouncing same.

Since I don't trawl in the waters of either site, I cannot, for example, quote examples of Obama supporters chastizing their more zealous fellows.

But "Gary" seems to have done so, because he's a better man than I, and puts paid to your assertion by pointing out that Obama supporters, even on those offending sites, have critiqued those whose posts deserved it.

And a good thing it is, because the ill-tempered zealots don't do any favours to the causes for which they presume to advocate. They only alienate more moderate and sober minds.

Sadly, you do much the same when you insist that "ALL ALL ALL" 18 million Obama voters are hooked up with DU or Kos, or whatever other sites are offensive.

A valid point isn't helped by overblown rhetoric; to the contrary, it is hindered, and the value of one's message is cheapened in the process, making one easier to dismiss and ignore.

Like the old song says, "It's not what you say, but how you say it." At present, your freely-stated hatred all but makes you indistinguishable from those you so abhor.

Surely that's not your intent?

[Cutting back on the "DON'T YOU DARE TO...." stuff would be a start. It's a transparently hollow debating tactic that's beneath you and the level of discourse to which you once aspired.]

BTW: Thanks to "Lori" for the well-reasoned and reasonable reply. I do think, however, that Obama himself has not behaved churlishly toward Hillary, and has offered her quite lavish praise.

You and I will agree that this is more political than it is a reflection of his actual feelings, because we all know he wants and needs her support.

But, I would suggest equally strongly that the behaviour of his most egregiously awful supporters doesn't reflect his personal feelings either. As time goes by, I believe we'll see Obama make some significant gestures toward Hillary, and not just because of political expediency. At least in part, he'll do it because it's the right thing to do, and to do less would and will reflect poorly on him.
 
Joseph, regarding the IP in question, I am not saying that Texas Darlin sent email using Larry Sinclair's name. I said it was possible the she "posted a comment under the name Larry Sinclair" on someone's blog where the IP was recorded. I don't know if she did, I'm just saying it might be a possible explanation. Also, I understand IPs and I understand that this information is used (by Obots) in conjunction with other pieces of info gathered to track people down. Also, Joseph, why don't you ask Riverdaughter why she publishes under a pseudonym, ask Alegre. Please don't judge others because they choose to keep their RL private.

Soberish, please let me know where you have evidence that TD has a problem with "dark-skinned people" as you suggest. I have not seen this. I would be the first in line to challenge her if I felt she was a racist.
 
Is this techdude Larry Sinclair?
 
What have you got against Rife's microscopes (not the model IV or V)?
 
next you're going to say that they can't make diesel fuel from e-coli bacterium
 
Joseph, It is amazing that the pro-Obama apologists are trying to use your well-founded, and well-intended, attempt to get to the bottom of a controversy as some sort of vindication, or verification, of their candidate.

Amazing yes, but typical. They seize upon any vagueness, or outright error, regarding something about Obama, as a means to try to justify their constantly covering up any and all errors, flaws, policy-reversals, etc. re Obama. They never admit mistakes, never attempt to correct lies/factual errors, and spend each day saying everything about him is right. Wrong!

I appreciate your efforts always, as I have stated to you before. I am glad, as you stated, that Obama opposition entities such as Cannonfire, unlike pro-Obama counterparts, do try to set facts straight, and let the chips fall where they may. Fairness matters, honesty matters, and principles supercede all. Thanks.

However, I assure the Obama worshippers that one (or ten) errors, made in attempts to vett Obama, do not mitigate the true negatives regarding him or in any way make them moot. I reject him, and shall continue to reject him based on what I see as a lack of judgement, character flaws, and a lack of experience.

Furthermore, in spite of all of the incantations to "look at his web-site", which I have done many times, I still find him to be without a history, and an absolute enigma.

Finally, as to the behavior of his followers, I have never seen such vehement, ad-hominem, baseless attacks, on any that oppose him, from any other source, in any other election, not even from the detestable far-right.

Obama's race, as is anyone's, is absolutely irrelevant to me. The consideration of such regarding business, political, or personal relationships/situations is foreign to me.

Yet, time after time I have been superciliously labeled a racist, bigot, etc., by Obama supporters, even on the NY Times blog, simply because I expressed some reservation about Obama.

I have never made a comment about him that could even remotely be considered racist. That is 180 degrees from who I am. The Obama supporters minimize, and diminish, true racism by turning the word into just another attack word like stupid, or idiot, etc., which they also toss about with abandon.

Never will I align myself, or associate myself with such an element, nor will I align myself with a fringe element of the Obama opposition that would employ such tactics.

I am me, my vote is mine, I have no reason to engage in malignant diatribe. I have no desire to try to win over, change the mind of, nor question the intelligence of any Obama supporter.

However, based on the exact reasons I stated, I do have the abject desire to see Obama defeated, and the Democratic party, as constituted, brought to its knees.

I shall continue to work toward that goal.
 
glrpatriot wrote:

Joseph, I am disappointed in your pursuit of outing TD's RL life info.

What is considered RL info?
Surely no one who spends all their spare time making themselves a public personality and outing a politician with facts and imaginings, expects to have their own NAME concealed by all and sundry?

I'll drop her name in a heartbeat when I get it, because she is a public personality.

Ray
 
Comment regarding Techdude.

I've been comparing the 'Techdude' samples from TexasDarlin/Atlas and the ones from the white supremacist site Stormfront with an increasing set of other blog authors/forum posters. This has reinforced my impression of the (shared) uniqueness of the pattern of punctuation in the Techdude samples.

For the following set of nine punctuation marks
.!?,;:-()
I extracted all instances from a compilation of the TexasDarlin/Atlas 'Techdude' posts (for a total of 1019 punctuation characters) and from a compilation of the Stormfront 'Techdude' posts (for a total of 1198 punctuation characters). For the two 'Techdudes' the relative frequency of each type of punctuation character was very similar. I likewise extracted all instances of these punctuation characters from a set of 40 other blog authors/forum posters (using large samples of text in each case to generate sample size of >1000 punctuation characters) . None of the other authors showed relative frequencies of punctuation characters that resembled the two Techdude samples (they each looked strikingly different from the Techdude samples).

I then used a Chi-squared test to determine whether different authors showed significant differentiation in use of punctuation characters (basically, a formal test of the hypothesis that two samples of text shared the same author versus were produced by different authors). The text from the two 'Techdudes' did not show significant differentiation from each other. But each of the 'Techdude' samples showed highly significant differentiation from all other authors I tested (p<0.01).

Likewise, the two Techdudes seemed to show similarities in word usage when I generated lists of words by frequency of use (and compared these to other authors).

Incidentally, the same methods indicate significant differentiation between posts by SusanUnPC and Texas Darlin. For example, more frequent use of question marks by Texas Darlin (8.1% of punctuation characters, versus only 1.6% for SusanUnPC).

On a more subjective level, there just seems to be congruence in style and tone of the writing of the Stormfront and TexasDarlin 'Techdudes'. E.g.

Stormfront Techdude: "Congrats to Henin on her win"
TexasDarlin Techdude: "Congrats KG"

Stormfront Techdude: "super secret government meetings"
TexasDarlin Techdude: "super expensive specialized Photoshop filters"

Stormfront Techdude: "heck I personally know quite a few"
TexasDarlin Techdude: "Where the heck are they all hiding?"

Stormfront Techdude: "I'm not 100% condoning it"
TexasDarlin Techdude: "just to be 100% sure"

Stormfront Techdude:
"ONE stupid white guy"
"incredibly stupid blacks"
"comes along with some stupid theory"
"One moment of gross stupidity"
"stupid Italians"
TexasDarlin Techdude:
"I will simply put my money on them just being really stupid."
"one of the stupidest of the counter arguments"
"can see just how stupid that argument actually is."
"ridiculously stupid and pathetic"
"Everyone is free to just assume I dislike all stupid people"

Stormfront Techdude: "There is nothing more annoying than"
TexasDarlin Techdude: "just to annoy some people."

Stormfront Techdude:
"hence my name."
"Hence more guests on that thread"
TexasDarlin Techdude:
"hence the reason I was personally asked"

Stormfront Techdude:
"this is the funniest thing you have EVER seen... and it is a real news clip of incredibly stupid blacks in America"
"which is 100% the funniest typo of all time"
TexasDarlin Techdude:
"Let’s start with some of their funniest and lamest arguments."


None of this is absolutely definitive. But the stylistic resemblance between the Techdudes does seem to suggest a common identity. Also, the Stormfront Techdude has advocated spreading negative information about Obama.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home


This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?


























Image and video hosting by TinyPic


FeedWind



FeedWind




FeedWind