Thursday, April 29, 2010

Randall Price: Ark Discovery a Hoax! (Probably)

Dr. Randall Price-Liberty
Again, the law of probability attaches little cost to proclaiming the "Noah's Ark Discovery" a fake, the odds are always in the favor of the doubter:
AOL News - "In a leaked e-mail that had made the rounds on the Web, Price, a longtime ark-hunter who directs the Center for Judaic Studies at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Va., says that in the summer of 2008, a group of Kurdish laborers, hired by a local guide working with the Chinese expedition, removed several large wooden beams from an old structure near the Black Sea, then hauled them to a cave near the peak of Ararat, long thought by believers to have been the spot where Noah's Ark washed up.

Price says that those photos of the supposed ark include cobwebs in the corners of the structure's rafters, 'something just not possible in these conditions.' "
No spiders I guess, could live on Ararat. And of course, no life could live in Volcanic vents on the bottom of the ocean, and there are no lakes at the bottom of the sea with life in them nor are there Antarctic lakes beneath glaciers, with life in them.

But there are.

I fervently hope the Ark has been found. The cruelest parts of me would enjoy the good laugh that comes with such a discovery.

The green jealousy of archaeologists and academics that didn't discover the Ark, is already on display. They have no more proof that the "Ark" was hauled up piece by piece than the discoverers do, to prove the Ark is there, or at least, that proof hasn't been offered. Yet.

Those that don't believe will explain it away. Islamic crazies will probably scale Ararat to blow it up, because it is an affront to Islam since Ararat is not Mt. Judi.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

"Hutaree" conspiracy now a question mark

This disturbing familiar pattern, to arrest, allege and then flood the press with negative stories has been seen before. To me at least, it seems the pattern is repeating itself over and over again with milk, food, religion and guns.
MyWay/AP - "The members of a southern Michigan group called Hutaree have been in custody for a month. An indictment accuses them of weapons violations and a rare crime: conspiring to commit sedition, or rebellion, against the government by first killing police officers.

Prosecutors say the public would be at risk if the nine are released. But defense lawyers claim the government has overreached with a criminal case based mostly on hateful speech.

An undercover agent infiltrated the group and secretly made recordings that have been played in court. While there is talk about killing police, it's not specific. In one conversation, there are many people talking over each other and laughing.

Roberts pressed that point more than once as Assistant U.S. Attorney Ronald Waterstreet argued in favor of keeping the nine in jail. The judge suggested she didn't hear or read in the transcripts any indication that violence was imminent.

'Mere presence where a crime may be planned is not a crime. ... How does this add up to seditious conspiracy?' (US District Judge Victoria) Roberts said."
This disturbing pattern of the Manna Storehouse, Rainbow Acres Farm and YFZ continues to show up. Crimes (if there are any) are exaggerated before during and after the event, more so if the the raids are high profile, and impressions are created in the public mind about who these people are.

Can the "Hutaree" ever get a fair trial? They might ask Merril Leroy Jessop.

Was it a "Fishing Expedition" which is the overriding theme of all of the other raids mentioned here?
"Waterstreet said the government is not required to show all its evidence at this early stage of the case. He referred to the words of militia leader David Stone, 44, of Clayton, Mich., who was recorded by the undercover agent while they drove to Kentucky earlier this year."
You decide. For me, it's too uncomfortably like YFZ and Ruby Ridge. Raid, gather up everything, create a narrative later. Use overwhelming force.

Those who resist that force don't tend to do well. Ask Mrs. Weaver. Those who don't resist it eventually are charged with something. There are too many laws.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Ark Doubters have their say

In truth, if it's not the ark that was just found, they're not Ark Doubters, they're fraud finders. Who is right? Probably the doubters:
National Geographic - "As a creationist, (Biologist Todd) Wood (director of the Center for Origins Research at Bryan College in Tennessee) believes God created Earth and its various life-forms out of nothing roughly 6,000 years ago.

'If you accept a young chronology for the Earth ... then radiocarbon dating has to be reinterpreted,' because the method often yields dates much older than 6,000 years, Wood said.

Radiocarbon dating estimates the ages of organic objects by measuring the radioisotope carbon 14, which is known to decay at a set rate over time. The method is generally thought to reach its limit with objects about 60,000 years old. Earth is generally thought to be about four and a half billion years old.

Across the board, radiocarbon dates need to be recalibrated, Wood believes, to reflect shorter time frames.

Given this perceived overestimation in radiocarbon daiting (sic), the wood the Noah's Ark Ministries International team found should have a 'traditional' radiocarbon date of several tens of thousands of years if the wood is truly 4,800 years old, Wood said.

'I'm really, really skeptical that this could possibly be Noah's Ark,' he added. The wood date is 'way, way, way too young.'

Wood thinks Noah's ark will never be found, because 'it would have been prime timber after the flood,' he said.

'If you just got off the ark, and there's no trees, what are you going to build your house out of? You've got a huge boat made of wood, so let's use that," he said. "So I think it got torn apart and scavenged for building material basically.' "
Wood has a point. Actually, more than one. In case you didn't understand his point well, let me rephrase. Wood believes that Radio Carbon dating is inaccurate and increasingly so as you go farther into the past.


Our cosmology, on which we base radio carbon dating, is all wrong. Without going to deeply into it, it is clear that if radio carbon dating shows that an object is a billion years old, but the Earth by other means can be demonstrated to be 6000 years old, then something happens several thousand years ago with carbon 14 absorption or decay that we haven't accounted for.

Another way of putting it? Carbon 14 dating is the product of a circular argument. "These rocks are 14 billion years old" says the geologist. The Carbon Dating assumption is then that the rock is 14 billion years old. It is also based on a constant rate of decay being assumed, and we haven't been observing radioactive decay long enough, to say with a certainty, that it is constant. We can't even say that Carbon 14 was present in the atmosphere in the same amounts that it is now, way back when. That's the rough form of the criticism of Carbon dating.

In short a group of amateur hoaxers may have offended the science of the group their pandering to, which are creationists and Biblical literalists.

I tend to agree that the Ark would have been building material, and not. That's a lot of wood, high up on a mountain and it was put together to withstand rough seas. Labor is in short supply, and there would be a lot of log jams as the flood waters receded. Wood is correct though, if he was saying the Ark was the only source of "processed" timber available.

In the end all the brainy explanations aren't why I think the doubters are right. It's just that the odds are in their favor. Every time one of these claims comes up, you could just say "It's a fraud" and you stand a "99.9%" chance, of being right.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Raw Milk and Religion are Bad for you.

Food, Sex and Religion, it used to be "Sex, Drugs & Rock 'n' Roll."
The Daily Caller - " 'They came in the dark, shining bright flashlights while my family was asleep, keeping me from milking my cows, from my family, from breakfast with my family and from our morning devotions, and alarming my children enough so that the first question they asked my wife was, "Is Daddy going to jail?" '

That’s how Amish farmer Dan Allgyer described an early morning visit last week from two FDA agents, two U.S. Marshals, and a Pennsylvania state trooper. Apparently, investigating a single farmer for possibly trafficking raw milk across state lines requires a show of force.

'I became aware of the cars as soon as I walked out on the sidewalk as part of my morning routine around 4:30 a.m. and immediately said to myself something is going on,' Allgyer wrote in a statement for the National Independent Consumers and Farmers Association. 'I was watching and noticed three cars were cruising down right behind each other, and immediately thought, hey, that looks like trouble. I watched and pretty soon one car came back and parked on my neighbor’s farm, on private property.'

After tooling around, the cars showed up Allgyer’s property. 'They all got out of their vehicles – five men all together–with big bright flashlights they were shining all around. My wife and family were still asleep. When they couldn’t find anybody, they prepared to knock on the door of my darkened house. Just before they got to the house I stepped out of the barn and hollered at them, then they came up to me and introduced themselves.'

Without telling him what is was, one of the agents handed Allgyer an FDA warrant that allowed the agents to inspect Allgyer’s farm. The warrant read: 'You are authorized to take all necessary actions, including, but not limited to, the use of reasonable force, to effectuate entry to the above-named premises, the land and buildings located there, at reasonable times during ordinary business hours and to remain thereon to inspect within reasonable limits and in a reasonable manner all portions' of Allgyer’s farm."
And so the strange parallels between multiple wives, pedophilia, raw milk and Natural Foods continue. We are "Modern" now, and being "Modern" means we don't do that dumb stuff anymore.

We don't eat food from the farm.

Girls don't marry at 15.

We don't believe Noah's Ark ever existed.

King David, a "man after God's own heart" just couldn't be expected to understand that God was an ERA supporter, and that polygyny IS ALWAYS abuse. Silly creation stories outlining an order of creation as being instructive in day to day life, that's just a sign of insanity.

If you believe that dumb book Gideon is forever forgetting in Hotel Rooms, you are dangerous. Project Megiddo lives on.

If you train people to believe a thing, and turn them loose with nothing to do, well, what will they do? I think it's safe to say that the statists (the political left), see religion as a bastion of sexism, odd belief and potential violence. The name may change, but if you equip emergency responders with a mental picture of the enemy and the personnel and equipment to pursue them, they will.

And so they go about, with increasingly vague warrants based on less and less information. It's less and less hard to believe the Randy Weavers of the world when they claim not to know who their attackers are, and shoot back.

So far in the last two years, vague warrants and inappropriate force have been chronicled three times by this blog.


The Manna Storehouse.

And now Dan Allgyer, the Raw Milk Distributing, violence forswearing Amish Farmer of "Rainbow Acres Farm."

Hat tip to Rob Port.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Noah's Ark Found?

Is this Noah's Ark?
I'm always enthusiastic about the possibility, because Noah's ark was a real historical object.
Since it was, the only question in my mind would be, is it still? There is no reason the Ark having once existed, still exists, but high elevation and several other factors do make it possible.
The UK Daily Mail - "The team of Turks and Chinese researchers from Noah's Ark Ministries International in Hong Kong say they made the discovery on Ararat - the biblical resting place of the ark - in October.

At a press conference yesterday to announce the discovery, another team member, Panda Lee, said: 'I saw a structure built with plank-like timber. Each plank was about eight inches wide. I could see tenons, proof of ancient construction predating the use of metal nails. We walked about 100 metres to another site. I could see broken wood fragments embedded in a glacier, and some 20 metres long.'

The structure had several compartments, some with wooden beams, the team said.

The wooden walls of one compartment were smooth and curved while the video shown by the explorers revealed doors, staircases and nails. The team said the wood appeared to be cypress although, according to the Bible, the ark was built from gopher.

The group ruled out identifying the find as a human settlement, saying none had been found so high up in that area. They are keeping the exact location secret."
I seem to remember that no one really knows what "Gopher Wood" is, perhaps now we know.
Christian Answers - "Most modern English versions of the Bible translate it as 'cypress.' This is probably incorrect and is really only a guess supported by very weak evidence. Why cypress? In trying to solve the identity of 'gopher wood,' some guessed that a transliteration might be involved ('kupar' into 'gopher'). Adam Clarke's Commentary says, 'supposing the Greek word kuparissov, cypress, was formed from the Hebrew rpg, gopher; for take away the termination issov, and then gopher and kupar will have a near resemblance.' Another supposed evidence for 'cypress' is based on the fact that cypress trees are large and strong, and in the post-Flood earth, at least, once grew abundantly in Chaldea and Armenia. Armenia is where the ark is believed to have landed, in the mountains of Ararat."
Either our Ark seekers are pandering, or maybe the modern scholarship is right, it's cypress.

I've been enthusiastic about possible finds before. There are a lot of charaltans out there in the Biblical Relic Search, but this is intriguing.

Here's a video of the find.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, April 23, 2010

One thing I think we can all agree on...

I'm not much.
And thank you Capt. Obvious, for pointing that out AGAIN. Of course, I can't be the most pathetic creature on the face of the planet, since no matter how pathetic you are, those that spend all their time talking about you have to be worse. Go ahead. Find a recent "open" thread without my name in it, I dare you.  It's sorta weird to read what you say so frequently taken out of context.  It's a lot like talking to the ex wife, which I avoid for periods of ten years at a time.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, April 22, 2010


The Modern Pharisee TRIED to buy, but failed:
I received a commitment this morning to help me purchase it, but it was not enough.

Rumor has it these winners, bought it. We'll known soon enough I suppose. Ha, ha, I'm outbid, by THAT thing?
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Game Changer

It's a whole new ball game.
The reason? I probably will NOT stay in Vermont, since today I learned I won't be working where I did work, anymore.

I have tried to make this a full time occupation, but the economic support for the effort, is less than tepid to say the least.

A recent post was geared at a fund drive of some sort, if you WANT me to do this, pretty much you'll have to PAY me to do this. It's as simple as that. I have the time now, to do anything I want, and I am answerable to no one except the LORD and the Landlord (who wants his rent in 2 weeks, and frankly, I don't have it.)

I can stay here in Vermont, and promote the legalization of Polygamy, FULL TIME if you wish for me to do so, but that now has a price tag. I can also continue to blog on other subjects.

Plain and simple, SEND MONEY, or DON'T. If the LORD wills it, it will happen. Otherwise my future goes down a different path.


Hugh McBryde
PO Box 433
Montpelier VT 05601

The first dime (figurative, it had better be one of those rare ones) I get, I will go down to the legislature and start doing what I need to do. Without it, I won't and I may have to board up the Modern Pharisee, at least for a while. Employers are picky, and I'm controversial. That's quite a corner to be painted into in "this economy."
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, April 19, 2010

A "Blues" calls the Pharisee's wife

No really, he did.
He says I have the wrong guy, and told me to "Back off." Rather "tersely" my wife said. Oh well. This would be the Metal Detecting Blues Persona.

Exactly WHERE did he get my phone number from? Malonis has it.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, April 18, 2010

If you think I am a positive voice for Polygyny

I need something now. Not soon, now.
You may contact me at my EMAIL address, which is hughmcbryde (at) gmail (dot) (youknowwhat). There is a rather sizable investment that could be made on behalf of polygamy in general. You'd own something in return, and you would get your money back, in all likelihood. I say that because there is no way to guarantee any investment, but the normal prospects are good.

This is urgent. If you're serious about the promotion of polygamy (specifically polygyny) as an acceptable "lifestyle," contact me right away.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, April 16, 2010

Elissa Wall interviewed by Utah AG (UPDATED)

Big (Blonde) Liar?
Yup, what Jane Blackmore said was credible enough, to put Elissa back on the hotseat:
The Salt Lake Tribune - "Roger Hoole, Wall's attorney, said the development was a 'concern' and that he felt it would be appropriate to remand the case back to the trial court.

He said Wall was voluntarily being interviewed by the A.G.'s Office on Thursday.
'If Elissa was involved at all, it was unwittingly,' Hoole said. 'This is very unfortunate and we're very concerned about it.'

He said the development didn't change the fact that she had been forced into an unwanted marriage and had nonconsensual sex.

(Michael) Piccarreta said (Warren) Jeffs' attorneys had just received the A.G.'s filing and were still reviewing it, but were 'pleased' that a witness had the integrity to come forward with the information, which he said 'undermines the integrity of the trial.'

'It also suggests that there is a long-term, ongoing attempt to obstruct justice or cover up this fact and people who are involved in this have to make a decision whether they will come forward and tell the truth,' he said. 'I would expect law enforcement would take into account people who have come forward and told the trust, but on the other hand there should be harsh consequences for those who continue with the cover up.'

Piccarreta said that 'generally witnesses who are involved in that behavior are not to be trusted in other aspects of their testimony.'

During the trial, (Jane) Blackmore testified under oath that documents introduced as Exhibit 43 were the original records of Wall's visits to her Canadian clinic for medical treatment."
This story, which I had been informed a week ago was "out there," probably broke with a tip originating in the Utah AG's office or with Roger Hoole, who we now know was having his client rather hastily "re-interviewed" by the AG's office while he was "unavailable for comment" earlier yesterday afternoon. Your Modern Pharisee pointed to idea that an INcredible witness in one area of sworn testimony tends to be regarded as an UNbelievable one in other areas. Hoole is scrambling to salvage his client's credibility or else the conviction fails. He's also trying to keep his client out of jail.

UPDATE - I was on the way out the door to work this morning, so I hadn't had time to fully round out my thoughts. From outward appearances, the prosecution of Allen Steed is dead. Elissa will be ripped to shreds on the stand whether she lied or not in testimony at the Warren Jeffs trial. Why? Let's downshift into Warren's conviction.

Warren should be able to lever this development into freedom (with regard to Utah) as well. Even if it is shown that Elissa did not consciously misrepresent facts, she can now be shown not to be able to remember them well enough to amount to a hill of beans. Warren should be given a new trial, and the developments this week will be used as a hammer against any testimony that is based on her distant past recollections.

Hasn't this always been the problem with old crimes based on witness testimony? People who in psychoanalysis suddenly "remember" a murder or a rape? Exhibit 43 is now for legal purposes, a fiction. The whole timeline is subject to question and it appears that Elissa's memory of it, bolstered by forged documents can't be relied on either. Why then would we rely on her knowing when her "rape" occurred? Even assuming that the rape did occur as she described it, she doesn't really have any idea when it happened.

Under the above scenario, Warren is granted a new trial, and the charges will be dropped.

You don't believe me? Hoole is in full client protection mode right now. Everything including Elissa's testimony is expendable, except for Elissa herself.

Also, you have to realize that if the statement of the AG's office was issued after Elissa's visit, they have already said they no longer believe her or no longer regard her as credible.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, April 15, 2010

Earthquake in Warren's Case

FLDS Leader Warren Jeffs
The Utah Attorney General's office is stepping out of the way, and letting Warren have his way:
"The (Utah) Attorney General’s Office told the Utah Supreme Court that it would not oppose a defense request for a stay of Jeffs’ appeal to allow for an investigation and an evidentiary hearing on the new allegations.

Assistant Attorney General Laura Dupaix wrote in the notice that Utah prosecutors were not aware of this potential evidence at the time of trial and had only learned about it two days ago. She wrote that the Attorney General’s Office is "ethically bound to provide notice of this potential newly-discovered evidence both to the Court and to Jeffs’ Utah Counsel.' "
This is major. It may lead to the conviction being laid aside and no new trial. If Elissa forged evidence, she is no longer a credible witness against anyone. Warren's conviction depends entirely on a credible Elissa Wall. Read more here.

The reason you don't appeal when you're in the process of appeal is simple. You expect the conviction to be reversed. Rather than play the obstructionist, the Utah AG's office is rolling out the red carpet for Warren's defense. That means not only do they believe what was heard from Jane Blackmore, but they don't think that when the facts are revealed, they could sell any other interpretation of them.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Another Nolo - No Trial for Lehi (UPDATED)

There will be no trial for Lehi Barlow Jeffs:
The San Angelo Standard-Times - "Lehi Barlow Jeffs, 31, took a plea deal for eight years in prison for sexual assault of a child who was bound to him in a nonlegal marriage when the girl was 15 years old. The assault itself, based on the birth of her child, was alleged to have occurred on Sept. 18, 2006.

Jeffs also plead no contest to bigamy, having had three wives, one of them legal. He was sentenced to eight years to be served concurrently with his other sentence."
It is probably that Lehi retained the right to benefit from appeals regarding the evidence, should Barbara Walther be reversed (Bill Medvecky says yes).
"(Michael) Emack also keeps the right to appeal based on the motion to quash the grand jury indictments alleging that the grand jury system in Schleicher County underrepresented Hispanics."
From the Standard-Times, January 22nd, 2010.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

What did Jane Blackmore Say?

Video Courtesy of

I've been sitting on this for a week, but, it's out:
A deputy (Washington County Utah) attorney confirmed to KSL they received information that Jane Blackmore, a midwife to Elissa Wall during a miscarriage and witness in the trial, lied during her testimony.

They are also looking into whether medical records she provided are accurate.

Jeffs was convicted of being an accomplice to the rape of Wall, for forcing her to marry her 19-year-old cousin when she was 14.

Attorneys for Jeffs had no comment.

At this point, no appeals dealing with this specific investigation have been filed."
There would be no hurry as this is not a "get out of jail free card." Warren is in jail in Arizona, and that has to be resolved, then there is the matter in Texas.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, April 14, 2010

Inquiring Minds, want to know (slightly updated)

Almost certainly not Da Blues.
"A" TxBluesMan


Natalie Malonis:
"Scott Reib is NOT Txbluesman. Unequivocally.

Scott and I did share offices but we do not any longer. Whatever you are looking at that shows me as sharing an office with him is outdated and has been for some time. We worked together, shared clients, shared revenue and expenses. Neither of us was employed by the other. We still work together at times, but we don’t office together and don’t have the same association and shared costs or revenue. Scott is one of the kindest, most sincere, upstanding people I have had the fortune of knowing. He is an outstanding lawyer and an even better human being. That is who you are trying to harm."
That is from her email to me, yesterday.
"Wrong again, pinhead.

I am not Scott Reib and have never been afiliated (sic) with OU's American Indian Law Journal, other than to read it.

Nice try though. Better than your last efforts.

Remember, you can't spell Pharisee, without "Phare." Sorta. And Scott Reib only claims to appear on a list in the American Indian Law Journal.

LATEST UPDATE: I have found about three "clearer" pictures of "TxBluesMan" as pictured above. Those pictures are not J. Scott Reib Jr. At this time, if I were to say Scott=TxBluesMan of "Coram Non Judice," then I'd have to say the blogger in question is certainly a committee, or the man pictured in the fuzzy picture above, is just ANOTHER man on the internet who thinks of himself as the "TxBluesMan." The man in the "Silverton" Colorado Sweatshirt though (in the clearer pictures), IS NOT attorney J. Scott Reib Jr.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Oh, look at this:

And of course, it is by an "anonymous" poster. Not that someone with a fake name is much better than "anonymous."
"I address the following comments to TxBluesMan :

Tx Blues Man,

After reading the Modern Pharisee’s posts from today, and considering that Hugh continues to attempt to out you, as well as considering Hugh’s continued harassment of your attorney, Natalie Malonis, I suggest that you expose the identity of the Pharisee’s wife, ******, in detail.

Hugh simply cannot respect anyone’s desire for privacy, and he deserves a taste of his own medicine.

You should publish his wife’s full name, as well as the name of her family of origin, and relevant details regarding her employment, so that he can learn exactly what it feels like to be 'exposed' when someone wishes to remain a private citizen."

Anonymous said this on April 13, 2010 at 8:35 PM
No, please, after you.

I'm not publishing my wife's first name, again. My wife's first name doesn't lead to much useful. You'll have to trust me on that for now.

A while back I did, precisely because you'd have to know more than just my wife's first name, to know anything else. Since it was being said that I had "published" her name, I removed it from my blog. This was not to "cover up" the evidence that I had "published" it, but to make it clear I wasn't inviting investigation. There is nothing about my wife's name that would lead, to her. You have to know far more than that.

When someone publishes copious detail about their "background," assaults the character of others from behind the blind of anonymity, and suggests that they can simply "out" people in some sort of "tit for tat" type of combat, they're wrong. They can try it, they can find out how wrong they are.

Natalie Malonis is an attorney. She works with attorneys. Attorneys are required to make public declarations about themselves as they are licenses to practice law in a state under it's laws. When an attorney practices law and tries a case and the progress of that case reveals a level of judgement (perhaps) and or lack of skill, and when that attorney fails so miserably in the discharge of their duties (for whatever reason) that the object of their legal attacks (which were no the first amendment) illustrates the supremacy of that right by doing a little in your face dance, it's fair game, and it's news.

And it was.

When that attorney later partners with one of the biggest FLDS enemies who in the humble estimation of many did a laughable job, it's worthwhile upon discovering that fact, to point to it. Bad attorney's who argue against their own arguments paired with losers who dared go up against the First Amendment, well, that's interesting.

The fact that J. Scott Reib Jr.'s resume resembles almost exactly what Natalie Malonis' client "TxBluesMan" claims, well, that's interesting too.

To equate that with license to parade about the private details of my anonymous wife's identity when she holds no professional license and eschews the limelight entirely is laughable. The only reason I wouldn't invite them to try, or say, rhetorically, "Bring it on," is that it could be misconstrued as a real invitation to go fishing.

These are evil people. They need to be defeated.

They need to know that I have no history of being intimidated.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Neener, Neener, Neener Updated with commentary from Natalie Malonis (& Blackmail!)

Consider the Stellar Company Natalie Malonis keeps: "big doodyheads who need to grow up, get a sense of humor and act like they've got a pair." No, seriously, that's a quote. From the News! BONUS MATERIAL TO FOLLOW!
To be fair, she only works with or did work with (Nat says no), one of the Big DoodyHeads' attorneys.
The Dallas Observer - "(Denton County District Attorney Bruce) Isaacks and (County Court at Law Judge Darlene A.) Whitten didn't see the humor in the satire and demanded an apology and retraction. We replied with a suggestion involving them 'and the horse they rode in on,' and off to the courthouse we went."
Bwahahahahaha... If I had dentures, I'd have shattered them on the opposite wall.
"Isaacks and Whitten contended that many readers believed we were reporting actual facts in the parody. In the Supreme Court's opinion, Justice Wallace Jefferson wrote, 'While a reader may initially approach the article as providing straight news, 'Stop the madness' contains such a procession of improbable quotes and unlikely events that a reasonable reader could only conclude that the article was satirical.'

And as for Christopher Beamon, whose woes started all this--we couldn't locate him for comment, but his former lawyer, Bill Short, says he stopped attending Ponder schools and about three years ago reached a confidential settlement with the school district without a lawsuit being filed."
Why do I care? Because one of the Barristers in the 8-0 blanking before the Texas Supreme Court was none other than Nat's employer (up until a year ago)(Nat says no), with whom she still bunks. It's the company you keep, or the company that keeps you, who you fly with. I get confused.

UPDATE - Natalie has something to say:Natalie Malonis has something to say:
"I was informed you have a post about Scott Reib, presumably to annoy or embarrass me. I see no legitimate communication purpose to your post. It appears your intent is solely to harass me by way of publishing information about Scott Reib.

Please note that your information about my association with him is incorrect. He was never my employer. Other information is inaccurate also.

You have made a commotion at the mere mention of 'your wife,' demanding privacy, threatening legal action, etc. You mentioned that your wife is collateral to any of your public activities and should not be mentioned. For the same reasons, I ask that you remove you references to Scott Reib and refrain from mentioning him in the future.

Thank you.

Natalie Malonis"
I have noted that you say he was not your employer. It's a reasonable assumption Natalie, that with an email address on record as being at the Reib Law firm, that you might have some sort of employee/employer relationship.

Everything I have linked to has been out there for a while. "Incorrect" does not suffice. Which parts are incorrect? "Scott" worked on the case that was blasted before the Texas Supreme Court, eight to zip. On page one it says:
On page two it says:
Plaintiffs/ Respondents Counsel for Plaintiffs/Respondents
Bruce Isaacks Michael J. Whitten
Darlene A. Whitten Mike Griffin
Michelle Jones
J. Scott Reib, Jr
Griffin, Whitten, Jones & Reib
218 N. Elm Street
Denton, Texas 76201
It says on YOUR site, that your address is 1173 Bent Oaks Court, Suite 200, Denton, TX 76210. It says at the Texas Bar Association, that his address is 1173 Bent Oaks Court, Denton, TX 76210.

His website also mentions he partners with Gerad Rosso. Gerad Rosso and you are both Attorney/Guardian Ad Litem's for Denton County. You folks all know each other, apparently very well from what other relationship indicators I have uncovered, such as your social networking pages.

Please tell me why you have a very close (at least in terms of distance) relationship with an attorney who has a Juris Doctor from Oklahoma (Class of '96) and is interested in Native American matters? (Deans Honor Roll Fall 1994 and 1995, American Indian Law Review.)

Nat also blackmails me:
"I have no interest or intent to do anything to you or to continue this exchange further. I was simply asking a favor based on the privacy interests of collaterals, something which you have stated is important to you. If you have changed your mind or didn't mean it sincerely in the first place, that's your business."
I can only take this to mean that Natalie Malonis intends to turn loose some sort of personal investigation into my life.

That's fine Natalie, but you'd better get permission from entirely private persons with no public walk, no publications and no interest in the limelight, before you say anything that identifies them. Stick to the public record, and you'll do well. So will those I know.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, April 12, 2010

What we are supposed to believe

Since I have drilled several dry holes on the identity of TxBluesMan. Hear first, this disclaimer. This, is a guess, but it's a good one, and it's one "Blues" brought on....HERSELF?
In the Wiki War controversy going on over at Wikipedia concerning the YFZ Ranch page, one of the immediate "interveners" was "BlueSooner." The little dust up over there served to help me understand several things about how Wikipedia works, including finding and identifying page editors, at least insofar as those editors identify themselves for the record. In other words, they use "handles," not real names in most cases.

Stroll around the identities of "Loquitor," "BlueSooner" and "BlueSooner/Natalie Malonis" and tell me if they don't know each other. One of the things you will see is that "BlueSooner" appears to be a "Storefront" for "BlueSooner/Natalie Malonis. When I discovered this, you could still see edits on the Coram/Wikipedia history page, now they only appear as "BlueSooner." Quite simply, "BlueSooner" is giving us every reason to believe they are "BlueSooner/Natalie Malonis," but now you can't find that ID, unless you look very hard, or already know where it is. That ID links to the "BlueSooner" ID, but "BlueSooner" doesn't link back to "BlueSooner/Natalie Malonis."

Quite simply All seem to come into existence at roughly the same time (March 2010) and create the "Coram Non Judice" self promotional page on Wikipedia (a no no if Blues and Nat are the same) and edit each other. "Loquitor" and "Blue Sooner/Natalie Malonis" hail from "Vassar" College, which though it is now co-educational, was known primarily as a "Girls School" until recently. This seems to suggest Loquitor is BlueSooner/Natalie Malonis, and we already seem to know that Bluesooner is Natalie Malonis.

The other possibilities are that Natalie and "Whoever Blues Really is" at least briefly shared an identity. That's also a "no no" for Wikipedia. It would be as if I tried to get around my current ban by posting as someone else. The bottom line though is that these posters named "BlueSooner" in some way shame or form have deliberately confused themselves and there is now more circumstantial evidence that they are the same poster, than there was to convict Scott Peterson of the murder of Lacey.

There may be exculpatory evidence that emerges, but right now, as it stands, TxBluesMan=BlueSooner=Natalie Malonis by their own deliberate or inadvertent acts of confusion. If they're not, then let them prove it. I've already had Nat mail me and say she represents TxBluesMan. It was speculated then, that she may have a fool for a client. There are some other possibilities emerging, such as past (present?) associates nearby that went to the right law school, but that's how it stands.

More →

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, April 11, 2010

Meat Puppets VS The Pharisee

And maybe Sock Puppets too, but that's harder to prove.

Read all about it here:

I don't want to lose editing privileges at Wikipedia, just when I seem to be getting the hang of it, but I wouldn't be getting the hang of it any time soon, had I not gotten embroiled in this business. Read all about it:
"In short, my edits, which started as a simple edit declaring that the evidence had been suppressed in Arizona, have been scrupulously true and unbiased. The motion granted termed the raid, in the Arizona Court's official legal opinion, as 'Unlawful.' They did this by ADOPTING the motion of 9/3/2008 by means of accepting the agreement of both defense and prosecution in the form of a stipulation. Those who are also engaged in reverting and editing the YFZ Ranch page have striven to alter it's content to show that a stipulation only was signed, and have elsewhere striven to equivocate the rejected offering or attempt at a unilateral stipulation on the part of the defense at an earlier date as being the one accepted. The 'war' started when persons having an agenda, and having a 'Single Interest' tried to obscure the little known fact (nevertheless a fact) that the evidence was genuinely suppressed in Arizona while using the terms 'unlawful' and in fact countenancing defense terminology in the process using the word 'illegal.'

'BlueSooner' is almost certainly 'TxBluesMan' who has written an advertisement for his Blog 'Coram Non Judice' on Wikipedia. A check of the authorship and edits shows that 'Bluesooner' and 'Natalie Malonis' (a single interest source opposed to the FLDS) authored the 'Coram' page. 'RonLawHouston' is almost certainly 'RonInHouston' who also posts on the same blogs and sites that 'BlueSooner/TxBluesman' posts at. Both are virulently anti FLDS and are engaged in self promotion. They almost certainly confer offsite, and make coordinated edits. The likelihood that 'Hope4Kids' who honestly declares bias is also acting in coordination with 'BlueSooner/TxBluesman' and 'RonLawHouston/RonInHouston' is extremely high. There are perhaps other contributing editors who also act in conjunction with these three. This is, as I understand it, by Wikipedia definition 'Meat Puppetry.' It may also be 'Sock Puppetry' but this is difficult to prove. The likelihood that these posters have other Wikipedia editor identities is high. There is considerable evidence from the 'Coram Non Judice' blog 'promotion/advertising' page that 'BlueSooner' shares editing identity with "Natalie Malonis" and may (long shot) even BE the same person. There is no assurance that these editors are even separate at all though it is likely that there is more than one real person behind them all.

These persons are fervently interested in suppressing the simple legal fact that there was a relatively unknown but nonetheless real setback for those prosecuting the various FLDS cases and defendants in Arizona. They have an agenda. They are certainly single interest, they have a high conflict of interest. They haven't even been here at Wikipedia as long as I have. I joined without any intent to promote or discuss FLDS issues as can be proved by my join date. These other editors, from what I can tell, joined after the raid commenced.

As a final offering, I am a real person, I have a name, I have no other identities. I post under the same name on my driver's licence and birth certificate. All of my qualifications, biases and interests can easily be researched and evaluated." Hugh McBryde 22:20, 11 April 2010 (UTC)--Hugh McBryde 22:20, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Extra! Extra! Read all about it!
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, April 10, 2010

Wiki Edit Wars, the Armistice

I figured it would end this way:
"On February 5, 2010, Arizona Judge Steven F. Conn approved a stipulation from the previous day between Mohave County prosecutor Matt Smith and Warren Jeffs' defense attorney, Michael Piccarreta, that evidence seized from the YFZ Ranch in Texas would not be used in any manner in Warren Jeffs' two criminal trials in Arizona. Based on the agreement of the attorneys, Judge Conn issued an order adopting the stipulation. Jeffs' first of two trials on charges of being an accomplice to sexual conduct with a minor is scheduled to begin November 2, 2010."
Since, in general, bloggers are considered less reliable sources than the print media, or the broadcast media, visibility, is everything.

In the "Main Stream Media," there is only one reference I know of to the YFZ Evidence being suppressed in Arizona. That is at Brooke Adams' "Plural Life" blog. This is an extremely insignificant reference. It is an official blog of the Salt Lake Tribune and though Brooke is a "Real Live Reporter," it barely qualifies as a Main Stream Media reference.

For this reason the only location for the revelation of this simple fact is Wikipedia. Shortly after the raid I made my first edit (I have been a member since 2006) to a Wikipedia article about the YFZ Ranch stating that the evidence has been suppressed in Arizona, checked back on it a few hours later, saw it still there, and didn't think much about it.

A month later I returned and found it changed to an outright lie.

Since then I have been trying to negotiate behind the scenes (as if that is possible) with "BlueSooner" (TxBluesMan), RonLawHouston (RonInHouston) and someone named "Hope4Kids" whose moniker I could swear I've seen in some form at their favorite site.

Since you can barely find through Googling "suppression" in conjunction with YFZ, the news about the Arizona ruling at anything other than what are considered "partisan" blogs (yes, that would be how new viewers would see me), it goes completely unnoticed by the casual follower of the story that (shock), some judges don't think the raid was conducted in a lawful fashion.

The various editions of the story went back and forth with me trying to find some way to present the term "unlawful" (as it was ruled that way) on the page without offense. I settled on simply quoting the name of the granted order and linking it to the official court record at the court site. Of course, that wasn't going to work. The way the "Blues Crew" characterizes the legal activity in Arizona, it was just a considerate concession of the prosecution, merely a "stipulation." Nothing more. The fact that it was a complete and total surrender on the part of Prosecutor Matt Smith doesn't daunt them one bit. This is a "spin" war in the mind of the reading public, as long as the turf of Wikipedia can be successfully defended against the insertion of the words "Unlawful," or "Suppressed" into the YFZ Record, no one will really know it happened.

Thus ends the battle for now, at least until a week from now, when the page is reopened for edits. I may have been as a result, barred forever from editing a Wikipedia page. So it goes. Before I edited the YFZ page I hadn't contributed anything to the online reference so I have exactly what I had before in regard to Wikipedia, nothing except a reference guide.

My promotion of the site may plummet though. Not that they will miss my 3 or 4 hits generated per day for Wikipedia, but nevertheless, if it goes as it continues to go, I'll just find some other way to get material to reference, instead of at Wiki. Unless they're the only ones.

Wikipedia represented a sort of "last best chance" for the FLDS to get the truth out, not a spin, the absolute truth that when outside of Walther World, the evidence and her decisions don't stand up. That's significant, but no one knows about it.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, April 09, 2010

Now Comes "Hope4Kids" to get the Spin up to Puking Speed. WikiWar 4!

This is a desperate crew, in full LYING mode. Wikipedia is of course, considered to be a reliable source, and if it's in Wikipedia, it's "true." See the spin increase to puking speed. If our planet spun this way, we'd be flung off into space.
"On February 5, 2010, Arizona Judge Steven F. Conn approved a Stipulation between Mohave County prosecutor Matt Smith and Warren Jeffs' defense attorney, Michael Piccarreta, that evidence seized from the YFZ Ranch in Texas would not be used in any manner in Warren Jeffs' two criminal trials in Arizona. [54] [55]Based on the agreement of the attorneys, Judge Conn issued an order granting the defense motion to suppress evidence and canceled a hearing on the issue.[56]. Jeffs' first of two trials on charges of being an accomplice to sexual conduct with a minor is scheduled to begin November 2, 2010." [57]
This edit is performed by Hope4Kids, who I assume to be no one in particular, but who has a Wikipedia profile bannering boldly how "Hope" is against Wikipedia Vandalism.

That's a tactic alright. Vandalize while loudly claiming what you are doing is not vandalism, but opposition to vandalism.

What has been done, to the entry? First of all there is a removal of a footnote linking to the Mohave County Courts site. That is the actual stipulation of February 4th. If anybody looked at the stipulation, they would see clearly that the word "Unlawful" is used, and they would see the authorship of the stipulation, as being from the defense team, not the prosecution. So "Hope" removes the more recent edit citing the February 4th date, and instead refers in spun language to February 5th, and deletes the link to Mohave County Courts.

Behind the scenes "Hope" cries vandalism on my part, and "Hope's" ardent opposition to vandalism, fervent adherence to published internet standards and sports a stupid symbol declaring "Hope" to be opposed to Wikipedia vandalism. While in the process of spray painting over a truthful reference to legal content, and a link to that content.

Now the casual reader does not know there was activity on the 4th, as an antecedent to the court order of the 5th, and unless they backtrack through the Mohave County Court site, they won't find the Stipulation of the 4th, to read. That Stipulation is very short, and to the point, and contains the word "Unlawful" in point three. Matt Smith signs it. The judge adopts the "terms of the order."

What "Hope" doesn't want you to read, or see or know, is that Judge Conn has agreed with a stipulation that says the raid is "unlawful" and has specifically used language that to pointedly state that the terms of that stipulation are adopted by the court. It's exactly as if the Judge had the defense write the order. He liked it so much, he signed on to it. So did the prosecution (Sorta).

An additional entry earlier in the Court Rulings section has now been added:
"On October 2, 2009, Judge Barbara Walther issued a ruling denying a defense motion to suppress the evidence seized from the YFZ Ranch, stating:

'The court finds that Defendants’ offer of proof of deliberate falsehoods contained within the probable cause affidavits to support the two warrants is unsupported by credible evidence.' "[53]
That's accurate, but combined with the same users unwillingness to have the word "Unlawful" appear, though it is used at least 3 times in orders embraced by the court in Arizona, they are trying to unbalance the article in favor of the view that Judge Walther (who has a vested interest) expressed.

An accurate section on "Court Rulings" would let the reader know that there are two very different legal opinions on the evidence that have been expressed by courts. In view of the fact that Walther has already been reversed in this matter, and she is being appealed on her evidence decision already, the reader would be served well to know this.

In the end it will be the courts that decide who is more credible. Judge Walther or Judge Conn. For now certain people don't want it known how badly Judge Walther was rebuked out of state. They don't even want you to see it. They want Judge Walther's rulings quoted for language, they don't want Judge Conn's rulings quoted for language. They delete links to the court documents that show that language, and they delete that language.

The truth is there are two opinions. Texas rules Texas and Arizona rules Arizona. For defendants in Texas, Arizona doesn't matter.


Eventually the twain shall meet

Don't Miss WikiWar 3, WikiWar 2 and WikiWar!
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Wiki Edit Wars, Pt 3, in which Ron (Fluffer) admits, he's spinning the page.

Oh, I was crazy to say "Ron in Houston" (whoever/whatever the heck that really is), was the culprit. But what's this?
"As I said, the documents you link contain no stipulation by Matt Smith that the raid was 'unlawful.' That is simply your spin as a polygamy proponent and one who feels you must control the 'substantiated perception.' This page is on my watch list and every time you change to try to add 'the raid was unlawful' I will revert the page." RonLawHouston (talk) 01:45, 9 April 2010 (UTC)"
But I thought I was wrong. Guys (gals, fluffers, committee, whatever), make up your minds!

And though I am also wrong about the use of the HPL (Houston Public Library) system, and a static IP (that's fixed terminal, hardwired to a "LAN") by Ron, and only at best "half right," Fluffer is posting now from what appears to be an offshore site to mask location. Though this post will appear April 9th, it was composed April 8th, and the above "correction" appeared notated as occurring 1:45 (UTC). That means Fluffer is in England, or using net camouflage. I'm wrong too about that, but now Fluffer is taking care to hide more thoroughly?

Enough of the gratuitous insults. The YFZ Ranch page used to read this way, after I successfully navigated Wikipedia notation protocols and created a referenced (with active linkage!) blurb about the suppression ruling in Arizona.
"On February 4, 2010, Arizona prosecutor Matt Smith signed a stipulation of the defense that '1.) That defendant's motion to suppress evidence (from YFZ be) granted, 2.)That evidence obtained thereby (be) suppressed (and) 3.) That the raid was 'unlawful.'[53] Judge Steven F. Conn accepted that agreement the following day[54] [55] stating that September 3rd, 2008 motion to suppress be granted[56]. None of the evidence may be used 'directly or indirectly' in Arizona. Jeffs is awaiting trial in Arizona on four counts of being an accomplice to sexual conduct with a minor, charges filed in 2007."
It now reads this way:
"On February 4, 2010, Arizona prosecutor Matt Smith signed a stipulation of the defense that '1.) That defendant's motion to suppress evidence (from YFZ be) granted, 2.)That evidence obtained thereby (be) suppressed [53] Judge Steven F. Conn accepted that agreement the following day[54] [55] stating that September 3rd, 2008 motion to suppress be granted[56]. None of the evidence may be used "directly or indirectly" in Arizona.' Jeffs is awaiting trial in Arizona on four counts of being an accomplice to sexual conduct with a minor, charges filed in 2007."
Ron the Site Fluffer is also Ron the Spinner. Lying is the order of the day. Fluffer is claiming that I said that Matt Smith said the raid was "unlawful." I did not. I said Matt Smith AGREED to a STIPULATION of the defense that said the raid was "unlawful." Ron is simply engaging in bald faced lying about what I said, and about what the orders, and motions say. Point three of the February 4th, 2010 stipulation written by the defense is SIGNED by Matt Smith, without reservation or qualification and contains the word "unlawful" to describe the raid. The Stipulation declares prosecution and defense agreement that the September 3rd, 2008 motion to suppress be granted. On page 26, the word "unlawful" is used. Judge Conn agrees without modification of the language of either document, to the September 3rd, 2008 motion.

Matt Smith AGREES to language that says the raid is "unlawful." Judge Conn accepts that language. Reporting that such language was used, is accurate. The liars on the other side cannot abide by people learning in a precise way, what the truth is. And that is, that the evidence was dismissed from Arizona courts, with extreme prejudice, as the result of an "unlawful" action, because Judge Conn states clearly, "The court signs the stipulation and adopts the terms thereof."

He might as well have said to Michael Piccaretta; "What YOU said."

 Oh, he did.

I would also note that the opposition has now caved to the reality that the evidence was in fact suppressed in Arizona, despite all the lying claims that it was not by their "ex spurt" legal team. They are now fighting the battle over the word "unlawful."
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, April 08, 2010

Matt Smith may not be talking, but Bruce Wisan can't shut up.

Of course he is a neutral party, not wasting money, and completely and only concerned with protecting the "beneficiaries of the Trust."
Matt Smith may be circumspect, but Bruce is effusive about the Tuesday raid:
KTVX-TV - "The other investigation was spurred by discoveries made by Bruce Wisan, an accountant appointed by a Utah judge to oversee the trust that owns just about all the land in the twin towns. Curious why the Twin City Water Works was not paying for trust for water, Wisan asked for an accounting. When Joseph Allred, the man who apparently runs Water Works refused, Wisan went to the judge. 'We subpoenaed the bank records,' said Wisan.

What he got stacks of checks from that subpoena. The checks represented payments made over a seven year period by Twin City Water Works - 4.3-million dollars in payments by a non-profit company that only wholesales water and maintains a few wells.

Wisan said many of the payments were to various construction companies and suppliers of construction materials. One example: $53,434 paid to David Richter for cabinets. Wisan asks, 'What are all of these construction expenses?' A good question since we could not even find an office for the company.

Wisan said, 'We think at least 50% of the money was spent on personal expenses.' As evidence, he point to a 2006 letter written by Allred to FLDS leader Warren Jeffs. Allred wrote, 'I am seeking counsel on whether or not to continue paying some home bills from the company funds.'

Allred does have a large home. A source tells ABC 4 Allred is living and working out of the compound on Utah Avenue in Hildale that was once home to former FLDS prophet Rulon Jeffs.

Allred was also apparently charitable with Water Works money. He gave $145,103 to the FLDS Bishop's Storehouse. $32,000 was specifically identified as 'donations and contributions.' Wisan concluded, 'In my opinion as a CPA, this is just a slush fund for FLDS leadership.'

If that's the case, then the next raid target Allred and not the fire department."
Except the Affidavit for the Warrants, doesn't read like that. At least not for that amount of money, or those exact expenses. It's more of a computer database grab.

It would appear ABC 4 went to Wisan, the all knowing, to find out "what happened." Maybe they should just let him anchor the news.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Mohave County Search Warrant 2010-00020

My first observation would be, Mohave County doesn't have a lot to do, this is only the 20th search warrant in that county this year. The rest are as follows:

Though I have often observed that Matt Smith is serving as a Tool for Texas, Matt Smith is also no fool nor does he seem to be fundamentally dishonest. Right away Matt attends to good police work by taking great care to be specific as to what persons, places, devices and vehicles he is looking for, plans to search, and why. There was a long run up to this investigation, dating back to January of 2008, before YFZ and involving records stretching back to 2004. If you contrast what Smith does, to what Walther did at YFZ, she and her cohorts do indeed look like Keystone Cops led by Barney Fife.

I am of course, no lawyer, but it looks like probable cause is well established, particularly if IPODS and underwear cannot be shown to be a legitimate purchase for the fire districts. It may be that later, a legitimate cause is found. A good deal of the "evidence" that Mohave County has will probably be explained away, but it looks like he has something.

Time may also show that funds were used and replaced in an ethical but procedurally improper way, in which case no crime of any consequence was committed and what crimes did occur, may be beyond prosecution. I'm still going to say Matt HAD probable cause.*

On the other hand though, there is the probably unknowable cause of Matt's motive. Having served as a Tool for Texas before, Matt is probably answering the call of handlers yet once again, and if he were asked directly, Matt would most likely play dumb. It's safe to say without smoking gun evidence that Matt sat down in conspiratorial fashion and picked out this particular group of people for tighty whitey investigations, the warrant will stand. Matt probably could investigate every county office for similar offenses and strike oil. Since he started investigating before YFZ, you can't say he saw YFZ evidence and looked here as a result.

Matt, if he is looking for something connected to Warren's prosecution, ultimately, has picked up an investigation thread, that is clean. Maybe not as to his unknowable personal motive, but clean as to all exterior appearances. At least, that's the way it looks now.

I would expect a good attorney to howl nonetheless that YFZ (blah, blah, blah) had something to do with this raid, because if the connection can be made, maybe this warrant goes out with the bathwater too. Worth a shot. It's a really long one though.

Here's the really relevant section of the Warrant:
"It is necessary to use the appropriate software to 'open' and view the contents of each file; the file name in the directory is not a reliable indicator of the nature of its contents, especially where there may be a desire on the user's part to conceal certain records."
Or; "I'm going to look at every speck of data contained on every device."
"It is likely that any digital device seized will contain data of a non-evidentiary value belonging to both the target and third parties. This review of this non-evidentiary data will be minimized to the extent that it falls within the scope of the warrant."
Or; "I'll try not to look at stuff I wasn't looking for, according to the warrant, I promise. We both know it's going to be there though, you know, the stuff I don't know anything about, that I'd like to see, that I'm 'not looking for.' "
"Specialized computer forensic software will be utilized to narrow the files and remnants of files by employing the use of search terms and other filters to comply with the scope of the warrant. Only those files or remnants of files that appear to fall within the scope of teh warrant will be provided to the case agent for further review. In computer forensics, hashing is a way to represent a piece of digital data (i.e. a file, a folder, a logical volume, a physical volume) with a unique numerical value by applying a mathematical algorithm to the data. When applied, a hash will generate a mathematical representation to a fingerprint. Two files with exactly the same bit patterns should hash to the same value using the same hashing algorithm. Hashing tools can be utilized to help exclude non-evidentiary items such as operation system files. There will be no use of hashing tools to search for known contraband such as child pornography without specific authorization by the court by probable cause. Should evidence of other crimes be discovered in 'plain view' while conducing a lawful search of the data, further search authorization will be sought from the court."
Or; "If there is a file I'm 'not looking for' in this warrant, I won't use it's unique characteristics that I already know, to go see if it's there, and then stumble upon it 'accidentally' and say 'Aha!' For instance, if there is a picture of Merriane Jessop on the computer, like the one at YFZ, it has a "fingerprint" and I (ahem) 'won't be looking for that." Similarly, if there is a known picture of a Playboy Playmate, I won't be looking for that either. I'll just have to have a reason to look at it, and then, well, look at it."
"There is no need for the extra expense of a 'wall' and 'review team' or 'filter team' in this matter as there is no known spouse, attorney, clergy, or physician privileged materials of the target or third parties expected to be located. In the event that such materials are located, they will be segregated and not viewed by the investigators. Therefore, it is appropriate for computer forensic examiners from the Attorney General's office and/or the DPS Computer Forensics Lab at which they are assigned to forensically process these digital devices."
Or; "I don't plan to have anyone looking over my shoulder either, the rationale is that it's 'too expensive,' and I am of course, trustworthy. You can trust me. Really. The reason you know I won't be looking at the data for stuff 'I don't "know" about' is because you can trust me. Really. I'm not on a (cough) 'fishing expedition.' TRUST ME!"
"At present, your Affiant has no intention of reading any electronic mail other than that of email pertaining to the specific violations listed in this affidavit. In the course of the continuing investigation, if it appears that there is probable cause to believe that the electronic mail of the targe or of other persons may contain evidence of other offenses; further application will be made ot this court."
Or; "Really and truly we all know I'm going to scour these files for every little thing I know about, suspect or don't 'officially know about.'

If I find something I'm looking for that 'I'm not looking for,' you'll be the first to know because I'll go to court, and tell them I found it, and apply to use it."

I'd advise the FLDS to do whatever they can to stop the examination of the evidence, and apply to have their own investigators present while the data is being looked at. That way it won't cost the state that inconvenient extra expense. We all know times are tough.

The reality may be that Matt just wanted into "Jake" Barlow and David Darger's houses. The rest is just for show. Anything found in the course of the "primary" investigation may just be a bonus.

* Apparently I am no longer an "FLDS Apologist."
More →

Sphere: Related Content

If the First Amendment isn't for the FLDS, it isn't for any of us.

Dr. Stephen Smith has twice made controversial comments (in his community) regarding the YFZ raid. Not one to let sleeping dogs lie, he goes back to bat, on their behalf:
"I’m going out on a limb here, taking a stab at a sensitive subject. The First Amendment to our Constitution clearly states that Congress shall make no law that prohibits the free exercise of practicing a religion. Whether we like it and agree with it or not, there is a large and persistent group of people who call themselves the Fundamental Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints trying to practice what they preach in their religion.

I have never stated that I agree with their religion. I don’t. But that is not the issue. The issue is: Do I want to defend their right to practice their religion? Yes I do. Because I would hope someone would defend me as I practice my personal religion and relationship with God as I understand God.

There are some hypercritical patriots in San Angelo who insist their God is bigger than my God. There was a German a few years back who thought his God was bigger than other people’s God. He mortified the world by incinerating and killing via other hideous methods millions of Jews because of their religious beliefs. Our country stopped everything it was doing in the 1940s to prevent this man from getting his way.

Now we are doing the same thing to the FLDS living in Schleicher County, only we’re decent enough not to turn them into potash because we call ourselves more civilized. The issue for many is a disgusting and pathetic need to be more concerned with trivial behaviors in our society at large, such as what Tiger Woods is doing with his genitals rather than helping my neighbor who is starving or being beaten by an abusive spouse.

More than one so-called Christian has told me that the FLDS just uses its religion as an excuse to practice pedophilia. Well, you are wrong, wrong, wrong. Until you go to the FLDS ranch in Eldorado as I have and see the simple and beautiful world they have created then you are showing how ignorant you can be to make any assumptions.

Again, I do not agree with everything the FLDS believes in. That is not the point. I do agree with their freedom to believe that adolescent girls having babies is one aspect of their religion that gives them favor with God.

I am not the one to persecute them. And no human being can deny that God created humans to be capable of having children in our teenage years. It is a biological fact of nature. Until just a few years ago when our society ruled it inappropriate, adolescent girls having babies has been the norm rather than the exception since the beginning of time.

The world behind the FLDS fences they have built to keep us out (and I don’t blame them) is surreal. It is beautiful. It is soft. Their lifestyle is an attempt to be loving and takes one back to a time when life was pure and innocent.

It is true that some have left the Mormon tradition and written books against such practices, but so have some Christians. Could not our own children write ghastly books about their parents and religious leaders as well? Of course they could.

But standard Christians don’t want to admit that we have a frightfully high teen pregnancy rate. We don’t want to admit that our divorce rate hovers around 50 percent all the time and would likely be more if some couples had the courage to end dysfunctional relationships. We don’t want to see that our prisons are full of drunkards and druggies and hobos because we aren’t willing to care for each other the way Jesus commissioned us to care.

We are the ones who have created a culture where it is not wise for adolescent girls to have babies (and I agree). We are the ones who carry emotional baggage from our pasts that creates pathological views of human sexuality. We are the ones who can’t get past our inhibitions, our fears and our demons that would allow us to treat others with love and compassion.

When asked which of the Ten Commandments was greatest, Jesus said, 'Love your God with all your heart and soul and mind and love your neighbor as yourself' (Matthew 22:36-39). In my way of thinking, the latter command includes any and all neighbors however radically different they might be from ourselves.

Dang, I wish Jesus hadn’t said that because it really is hard to love anybody different from us.

Contrary to what I was quoted as saying in the Standard-Times on Dec. 10, I do not believe that laws should be changed so older men can have sex with younger girls. What I did say was that perhaps we need to pause and rethink how we can legally accommodate and respect the FLDS in their practice of religion.

Now, I’ll just sit quietly and wait for the rocks and hope those without sin will be the ones to cast the first stones."
The San Angelo Standard-Times, also has the courage to print his column. Dr. Stephen Smith is a San Angelo physician. There is more to his column, please go to the Standard Times site, and read it for yourself.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, April 07, 2010

Why can't they...get along?

The "Sporting Pharisee" is a Miami Dolphins fan, as some of you may know. I have been one since before Don Shula. Before there was even one winning season.
One of "our" (notice the ownership) division rivals is the New York Jets. Why would the "Fins" let one of the greatest defenders, a man with gas still in the tank, go to the enemy?

It sets up the possibility that Jason alone could be responsible for the Dolphins losing a division championship in 2010. Jason is one of the few players who can seem to "will" victory, from defeat. Playing for an inferior Miami Dolphin team in 2006, IN Chicago, Jason came from a "down" position (DE/LB) to influence the game so heavily that he won it on his own.

Playing DEFENSE.

At a lineman's position.

Against Chicago.

In Chicago.

Against an undefeated team (at the time).

The Dolphins at that point in the season had only one win.

It just doesn't make sense to me to let him go when he has almost certainly, a few more such games to play.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, April 06, 2010

Hildale Mayor David Zitting Speaks Out on the YFZ Anniversary Raid.

Hildale Mayor David Zitting
The normally quiet St. George Spectrum has the story:
The Spectrum - " 'We don’t know the reasoning behind it,' said Hildale Mayor David Zitting. 'Yes, there’s been search warrants for fire stations in both communities. It’s centered on the fire department, coming from Arizona. The Washington County (Utah) Sheriff’s department is assisting, but it’s an Arizona action.'

Zitting said the two communities signed an interlocal agreement, combining funds from the Hildale city budget and Colorado City Fire Special Service District to provide protection for the region.

He said he’s unsure how much is in the Colorado City budget, but estimates the Hildale Fire Department budget at about $200,000.

'It’s passed every year, audited by independent auditors, so I don’t know where the budget can be a concern,' Zitting said."
Zitting seems to be waking up to something. It's not that he's clueless, it's more that he is (or was) trusting:
"There has also been impetus from the attorneys general of Utah and Arizona to have the two cities disincorporated.

'It has a tremendous impact,' Zitting said of the presence of approximately 50 law enforcement officers in the twin cities. 'What can you do but try to carry on? Of course, it has impact on the public perspective for one thing and there seems to be no end to them (law enforcement) trying to find another way to come after the cities.'

'It began with people who lived in the cities and became disenchanted. It escalated after that. We just try to carry on from day to day. We don’t know what’s coming from one day to the next, but it’s not something I fret over or that we make a big issue in our mind.'

Zitting is still incredulous about the attempt to disincorporate the twin cities.

'It’s just one issue after another,' he said. 'The thing that really amazes me is if they can invent a way to force disincorporation of a public entity in America, something's wrong with that.' "
Mayor. They hate you.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

UPDATED AGAIN: Warrant Storm (Fishing Expedition) descends on Hildale & Colorado City

Matt Smith looks for Evidence
To mark the second anniversary of the taking of the children?
Law enforcement in Short Creek are getting in their licks:
"Residents told The Salt Lake Tribune that an unspecified number of officers were at the Colorado City Fire Department and at the Hildale Town offices. The twin towns are home to members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, which has been under intense government scrutiny since 2002.

A spokesman for the Mohave County Sheriff's Office confirmed that there were 'a few' officers in the community 'conducting some type of business.'

Molly Edwards, spokeswoman for the Arizona Attorney General's Office, said that she could not comment because the state was involved in an 'ongoing investigation.' "
A member of the community "tipped" me, it is confirmed by Brooke Adams.

"Mohave County Attorney Matt Smith did not immediately return a telephone call seeking comment, and a secretary said it was unlikely he would talk about the investigation."
Is Matt Smith on a fishing expedition just like two years ago in Texas, but on a smaller scale? One speculative purpose for the raids would be gaining more documents to find another basis for "knowing" certain things he wants to "know" in the case of Warren Jeffs in Arizona.

Matt has been cut off from a lot of evidence he previously had. I wonder if these raids would ultimately be proved to be fruit of that "poison tree?" The YFZ evidence in Arizona IS such fruit, at this time.

Matt's problem now on all fronts is anything he collects in any way shape or form, his opposition will howl that he only knew about this or that because he peeked at ranch evidence. I know if I were representing any client being searched right now, I would already be howling.

(UPDATE 2) If it's not a fishing expedition (see above), it looks that way to local residents:
"Glen Jeffs, also a volunteer firefighter, said authorities were 'on a fishing trip looking for something.'

Attorneys general in Utah and Arizona backed a court takeover of the community's United Effort Plan Trust in 2005. The trust holds virtually all property in the two towns."
Clearly, the law is regarded as lawless.

If you want to be amused, the "Homepage Mascot Blog" of the Houston Public Library can be counted on to miss whatever qualification you make to your remarks.

(Pssst, boys and girls, if you want to be # 1 on the internet, sneak into the library at night, and set all the terminals to YOUR WEB PAGE as HOME PAGE.)

Question, how can a blog which does nothing but kvetch about the FLDS (and me) be that big?

I mean, their rise is nothing short of meteoric. They should issue stock.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, April 05, 2010

More Wiki Wars (YFZ Ranch Skirmish)

I admit, it's sorta fun, in that I am learning a few things about "Wikipedia" that I may be able to use in the future.
The not so fun stuff is the bias I am running into in writing the page. The fun stuff? I'm getting a school of hard knocks education in Wikipedia. Something I may be able to use at a future date.

This is how the Wikipedia page on YFZ Court rulings now reads:
"On February 10, 2010, Arizona prosecutor Matt Smith agreed not to use any evidence seized from the YFZ raid at the upcoming trial of Warren Jeffs. Jeffs is awaiting trial in Arizona on four counts of being an accomplice to sexual conduct with a minor, charges filed in 2007."
This is a modification of my short lived experiment to successfully contribute to Wikipedia. The original addendum to the section on "Court Rulings," read as follows:
"On February 5, 2010, all evidence seized during the YFZ raid was ruled inadmissible in cases involving Warren Jeffs in Arizona. The prosecution was barred from using that evidence either directly or indirectly."
This, I might add, is scrupulously accurate, albeit brief. The current entry is a modification of mine. It is inaccurate as to date, and misleading. It implies Matt Smith only "agreed" not to use evidence from YFZ, but what he agreed to was a motion that was a motion to suppress brought by the defense. Since an evidence suppression hearing is like a trial of the evidence (something Judge Conn mentioned), the roles of defense and prosecution are reversed to some degree and the evidence goes on trial, with the defense prosecuting the evidence.

Under these circumstances when Matt Smith (defending the evidence) agrees with Michael Piccarreta (prosecuting the evidence), he is pleading the evidence guilty. The evidence is then "put to death" and cannot live again, in court. This is known as Evidence Suppression. Matt pled his client guilty. The evidence is suppressed.

At any rate, I figured I had done it wrong somehow, and I tried again, with this entry:
"On February 4, 2010, Arizona prosecutor Matt Smith signed a stipulation of the defense that 1.) That defendant's motion to suppress evidence (from YFZ be) granted, 2.)That evidence obtained thereby (be) suppressed (and) 3.) That the raid was 'unlawful.'[52] Judge Steven F. Conn accepted that agreement the following day[53] stating that September 3rd, 2008 motion to suppress be granted[54]. None of the evidence may be used 'directly or indirectly' in Arizona. Jeffs is awaiting trial in Arizona on four counts of being an accomplice to sexual conduct with a minor, charges filed in 2007."
The entry is now more detailed, and was now linked directly to the Mohave County Arizona court site, to each specific order or document, and quoted directly from those orders and motions.

I figured that Wikipedia's policies required more specificity on controversial topics, and while struggling with the formatting, I pretty much got it right. The formatting, that is.

It was almost immediately changed back to the way it reads now, and as if for spite, an additional "grind your heal into the neck" entry was made about Merril Leroy Jessop's conviction:
"On March 19,2010, Merril Leroy Jessop was sentenced to 75 years in prison for one count of sexual assault of a child. Jessop was convicted of illegally marrying and then fathering a child with a 15 year old female."
The culprit? "RonLawHouston"

In essence then, the page is being written by FLDS haters. The entries are superficially "neutral" but if even a factual edit is made that deviates from the narrative that is desired by the haters, someone swoops in, and changes the page back to the "less favorable to the FLDS" version. In this case, a version that is a lie in favor of a copiously researched and referenced version that just so happens to favor the FLDS case.
More →

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, April 04, 2010

Vanity, thy name is.....Ron? UPDATED

About the middle of last month, someone made a rather brash promise, which I thought they would make good on, and did.
I got this little love note in the form of a comment from "Ron in Houston," whoever he/she/they is/are:
"Apparently your

'Authori -Tay'

has diminished and is well on its way to obscurity.

Your current Alexa rating: 387,641

Current rating of Texas FLDS: 383,772 and rising every day."
I'm sure it will, "Ron." Since last month those behind the site Ron brags up have been conducting what amounts to a small "denial of service attack" against their own site. Well, more accurately a "denial of service" attack is the same sort of tactic used to phony net ratings, multiplied exponentially, so as to block legitimate users from accessing a site, a sort of internet traffic jam.

The point is, the "hits" aren't real.

How do I know?

Aside from the fact that the "ratings rise" was meteoric in nature (approximately 2 weeks from the internet boondocks to stardom in a "no FLDS news" environment), there is this curious fact. FLDS Texas site visits, have no antecedent, no "precursor," or in internet lingo, no "upstream."

100 % of FLDS Texas visits go downstream to "Google," and none of them come FROM somewhere before they get to the blog.

By contrast there were several upstream sources and downstream destinations relating to the Modern Pharisee.

An analysis of search terms shows nearly 81% of the "other" site's visitors that came as a result of a search term, coming as a result of just the term "FLDS." The next place finisher also included FLDS and Walther, so really 85% came from one search term, the next place finisher was "Merril," at 1.26%.

For the "Modern Pharisee" there were 8 other search terms that outranked their second place finisher, including searches for me, by name, specifically as an exact phrase.

All this means is the numbers were "doped" or "juiced" and the obsession of those at that site is so overwhelming that they sought to win our little match by monkeying with their own score card. It also means that I am so important to them, that they felt it necessary to tie up several computers nailing their own site repeatedly so as to create the impression, all for my pleasure, that they were kicking my behind.

As you wish.

I haven't blogged about site rankings as a topic much in the last 7 months, the last significant post on the topic being in September of 2009.

It's also hard to believe that I'm dealing with many real people in that group, it's hard to even call them a "crowd." They continue to have remarkably similar sensitivities and bursts of temper and styles of trying to get a reaction out of me personally. You should see the emails I get. "Ron" even ended his little tantrum, with this:
"Post some more Marty Braemer posts and maybe those folks who really give a crap will boost you a few points."
Why do they care so much about Marty?

Marty is a guy who diddles teachers, and does it right in front of kids, and then calls the kids liars. He's an apparent embezzler from charitable and non profit organizations, like the Fort Plain Little league, and "they," whoever "they" are, seem to really be sensitive about me picking on Marty, "TxBluesMan," whatever the heck THAT is, once tried to extort me to remove posts ABOUT Marty.
TxBluesman (August 31st, 2009) - "I'll make a deal with you.

You take down the series of posts dealing with the adulterous preacher who you apparently dislike and issue a public apology, and I'll take down Stamp's comment and issue an apology for his comments.

You incessantly slammed this preacher, humiliated him and the woman he was involved with, when one post would have been sufficient. There was no need for that type of conduct."
Why the concern for a lecherous, adulterous Independent Free Baptist Pastor who abuses kids (albeit indirectly) by conducting sexual affairs right in front of them? I mean, I thought they were all about old men abusing kids in some sexual way. Granted, what Marty did isn't having sex with kids, but groping someone else's mother right in front of a kid, isn't a whole lot better.

Why the concern about someone who seems to have stolen kids baseball money?

Weird. I can't fathom it and I really don't spend much time trying.

Oh, while I was composing this, Ron wrote another love note:

Perhaps I'll boost your ratings...

Oops maybe not, because I only have Alexa installed on my firefox account!

How does it feel to be rapidly sinking into obscurity?"
Go back to your boiler room Ron. By the way, are you admitting to hammering your own sites with hits?

UPDATE (4/5/10 6:41pm Eastern): Best theory as to how "Ron" (who doesn't care about site rankings) faked it.

There is no "upstream" source for the hits to FLDS Texas, they are all direct.

Ron rigged the home pages for the Houston Public Library so that the would pull up FLDS Texas. The next page DOWNSTREAM from FLDS Texas, is Google. (Average user signs on, and says: What the !(*@)^#)(*, and then goes to Google.)

Is "Ron" more than a Lawyer? Is he...a....a.....LIBRARIAN?

Or is that just where Ron gives legal advice?

MORE WONKY STUFF: I mentioned above, there is no "UPSTREAM" to FLDS Texas site visits. What this means is that whoever is coming to the site, came there because the browser they used had it's "home page" set to the site, or they typed in the web address or accessed it from favorites on a "blank page."

FLDS Texas, during it's rocketing rise in Alexa Rankings, had a corresponding "Descent into Hell" plummet in it's visitors by "search results." Namely, over the last month, 75% fewer people found the site as a result of "googling" it. That suction was so powerful, that it took the 3 month ranking to -73%. By contrast, this site experienced a 114% increase in discovery by search, maintains a healthy "upstream" number and downstream one (in terms of diversity). The Pharisee's rise reversed a 3 month downward trend at a time when I wasn't posting much (sometimes going a whole week without opening my yap).

For those of you wondering, a "diverse" up and downstream means I am being visited by individuals, of their own volition who have their own agendas and come from wherever they were, going to wherever they want on the internet.

When no one looks for you in the cyber age, but you're suddenly found, and all those who find you go to the same somewhere immediately, the behavior is programmed and unnatural. Quite frankly, it is the "preponderance of evidence" needed to say that someone rigged a bunch of computers to go to a site to "fluff" it's numbers. Those computers (or some of them at least) are probably those of the Houston Public Library. And yes, I do have IP evidence, publicly available if anyone wants to know, of at least one "static" IP used at the Houston Public Library.

The network administrator of the Houston Public Library can identify and walk you to the actual computer in question.
More →

Sphere: Related Content