Rady Ananda, Rob Kall and OpEd News

[Laura]

I just came across this article posted on Facebook:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=20369

Atmospheric Geoengineering: Weather Manipulation, Contrails and Chemtrails
A Review of the "Case Orange" report

by Rady Ananda

I skimmed through it and since it seems to be pretty obvious to me that weather engineering is NOT what is going on with so-called "chem trails," but despite everything we point out about it, it just won't go away. As ya'll know, this whole meme was started by a CIA funded book "Angels Don't Play This HAARP." (Search forum for details on that). So, coming across this article made me really wonder about this Rady Ananda who is now pushing this on globalresearch. (My, their standards have fallen!) So, I went on a search to see just who Rady is.

I found a couple bios, like on OpEd News:
_http://www.opednews.com/author/author2795.html

In 2004, Rady Ananda joined the growing community of citizen journalists. Initially focused on elections, she investigated the 2004 Ohio election, organizing, training and leading several forays into counties to photograph the 2004 ballots. She officially served at three recounts, including the 2004 recount. She also organized and led the team that audited Franklin County Ohio's 2006 election, proving the number of voter signatures did not match official results. Her work appears in three books.

Her blogs also address religious, gender, sexual and racial equality, as well as environmental issues; and are sprinkled with book and film reviews on various topics. She spent most of her working life as a researcher or investigator for private lawyers, and five years as an editor.

She graduated from The Ohio State University's School of Agriculture in December 2003 with a B.S. in Natural Resources.

A few more details here:

_http://ca-50busbybilbray.org/Rady%27s.htm

Rady Ananda worked as a paralegal or legal investigator across the spectrum of Plaintiff-trial law for eight years. Switching plans midlife, she resolved to work professionally for the environment and earned her BS in Natural Resources in 2003.

Learning of the dangers of voting on electronic machines, she became involved in the election integrity movement in 2004. Today she applies her skills in exposing fraud and weaknesses in the US election system, and in crafting solutions that support free, transparent and accurate elections.
She became involved in the CA-50 election debacle in July, 2006, assisting attorneys and activists in objecting to the illegal conduct of the June 6, 2006 election in San Diego.

Rady matrilineally descends from Mayflower passenger (and Massachusetts’ first governor), William Bradford. Her great-great grandmother headed the California Women’s Christian Temperance Union. Sophia Churchill set national precedent for WCTU by publicly endorsing women’s suffrage in 1883 at the WCTU’s Annual Convention. “It’s sadly ironic that my ancestors arrived here with a dream that, nearly 400 years later, hasn’t been realized. We’re still fighting for the commoner’s right to vote, for citizens’ right to determine who represents our interests, who protects our fragilities.

“Grandma Churchill didn’t live long enough to realize her dream of ‘Votes for Women’ but she inspires me today as we resist the privatization of our elections. Democracy is something you do: we citizens need to hand-count paper ballots at the precinct, before all who wish to observe. Corporations should be nowhere near the people’s vote. That’s democracy.”

Here's the only book she's reviewed on amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/pdp/profile/A3HBWJVHA80JYL

Here's one of her pieces:
_http://coto2.wordpress.com/2009/11/22/extinctions-over-population-and-the-profit-paradigm/

I searched and we have at least 11 pieces by her on sott (use the search function and type in: "inauthor: ananda" (without quotes))

Among those pieces is http://www.sott.net/articles/show/209683-Felled-by-Pathocracy-Rachel-Corrie-Palestinians-and-20-Newly-Killed-Humanitarians

where there is a comment at the end: " Editors Note: The material attributed to Dr. Lobaczewski in the above quotes are actually the work of the author of the Ponerology Blog". All that suggests is that Rady isn't a careful researcher.

Then, I stumbed on this:
http://www.nelsonguirado.com/index.php/asymmetric/2007/10/05/rob_kall_a_communist_slimeball_white_hat

where Rady Ananda makes a comment as follows:

Comment from: Rady Ananda [Visitor]
Rady AnandaWell it has finally happened! Rob Kall is such a woman hater! The woman he was with just left his sorry ass after 12 years! And now with all his hatred for us women, he bans me! So I recently wrote to NYT writer Peter Baker: "Rob Kall, owner of OpEdNews.com website is using your recent article to promote his website. This man Rob Kall lets anyone write anything on his website. You will find UFO followers writing articles there. You will find people who are subversive and write articles against their own government accusing them of criminal conspiracies, etc. such as 911. You will find numerous articles against Israel and zionism on Rob Kall's website. Rob Kall desperately wants legitimacy and you just gave it to him with your recent article "Favorites of Left Don’t Make Obama’s Court List." Please DO NOT ever again use any comments from this subversive whacko website! You are helping the enemy of America legitimize themself and they are now using you so be aware! OpEdNews is BAD news! Been missing you pappy! It was not me who banned you! It was Rob Kall. I liked your sass! Rady Ananda, former senior editor OpEdNews.com
05/31/09 @ 08:02

Let's zoom in on part of that:

Rob Kall lets anyone write anything on his website. You will find UFO followers writing articles there. You will find people who are subversive and write articles against their own government accusing them of criminal conspiracies, etc. such as 911. You will find numerous articles against Israel and zionism on Rob Kall's website.


Obviously, the above describes me. And yet, this woman, Rady Ananda, picks up on ponerology and writes about it, and then goes on about chemtrails as weather engineering.

What's up with that?

I really think we are going to be seeing a whole lot of new cyber-warfare activity with "up and coming" bloggers, writers, etc... who are paid to just confuse and muddy the waters, who do not take time with their research, who are fear mongers (yeah, there's a lot to be worried about, but let's keep it real, huh?) and we ought to be working on spotting this whole new generation.

 

[Joe]

Here's an exchange I had with Rob Kall of Oped News a few months back. Previous to this first email (below) that I sent him, I had an exchange with an Opednews editor who had rejected, without good reason, an article I submitted to Oped News.

Hi

I recently submitted an article to OpEd News. The article is available to view here. http://www.sott.net/articles/show/205273-Legislating-Away-Your-Freedoms-One-Homegrown-Terrorist-At-A-Time

The OpEd News reviewer of my article was Richmond Shreve. Mr Shreve rejected the article based on an omission of one detail and based on that he, and I quote. "rejected the whole piece concluding that you were not reporting honestly"

Are OpEd News reviewers instructed to engage in this kind of bias and dismiss articles out of hand in this way, or is this simply due to Mr Shreve's own bias?

Having read some of Mr Shreve's articles on OpEd News, almost all of which are simply short opinion pieces, I am somewhat bemused that someone of Mr Shreve's interests, background and opinions is reviewing articles like mine that deal with exposing the lies behind the war on terrorism and that which is used to justify it. Based on a perusal of his articles it seems that Mr Shreve is largely pro-war and pro-government.

In this article:

http://www.opednews.com/articles/What-is-The-Army-Experien-by-Richmond-Shreve-090915-976.html

Mr Shreve defends the US military's use of computer games to increase recruitment. A large number of academic studies have been done over the past 10 years that point to the decidedly negative effects that computer games have on young people, not to mention the graphic violence that players experience with war games like those produced by the US military. That these games equate to the brainwashing of America's youth into joining the US military and fighting and dying for illegal wars seems obvious to anyone with an ability to look objectively at the subject. Does Mr Shreve's pro-war and therefore pro-violence stance meet with the type of message that OpEd News wants to promote?

Mr Shreve also promotes the official government story of 9/11 and roundly dismisses "conspiracy theories". Does OpEd News not think that the mainstream media does a good enough job of parroting the government line about 9/11 and conspiracy theories without OpEd News joining in?

As an editor, does anyone review Mr Shreve's articles?

If OpEdNews is in fact interested in combating government lies and is truly anti-illegal-war and the killing of innocents in the false name of freedom and democracy, I would appreciate that some action be taken to remedy the bias that Mr Shreve has displayed.

I am an editor of the News web site Sott.net. I would like to think that OpEd News could be counted as an ally in the fight to expose the big lie and serve the truth. If this is not the case however, I would feel it is my responsibility to inform our extensive reader base about the matter.

Regards

Sometimes one detail is THE detail.
YOu have attacked Richmond without defending your article or the detail he referred to. That suggests to me that his criticism was not defensible. And THAT leads me to conclude that his conclusion is one I will choose to back up.

Could be there's not a good fit with you and OEN.

Rob Kall
Publisher opednews.com

Rob, the central point of my article was to show how in the couple of weeks since the introduction of McCain and Lieberman's bill, five separate instances of "homegrown terrorists" were given high profile in the mainstream news. There seems good reason to be suspicious that the pushing of these stories was designed to justify the constitution-shredding bill, which gives the US president power to indefinitely detain US citizens on suspicion of being "homegrown terrorists".

This was my point.

The fact that the former nuke plant worker shot a guard in an escape attempt long after he was arrested as an "american terrorist" was NOT important to the point I was making. The fact that he was arrested as a "homegrown terrorist" was. I made this point clearly in the very first few paragraphs of the article.

That your editor picked on the single point of the omission of the shooting, which was not relevant to my point, and used it to justify dismissing the entire article was unreasonable.

That's it in a nutshell. I also can't see the sense in having editors who disagree with conspiracy theories deciding if conspiracy theory articles are accepted.

Your email has provoked serious discussion among our managing editor team. I appreciate you pursuing this. What's your phone number? I'd like to chat

Rob Kall

Hi Rob, I'm in France at the moment. You can reach me from the US on *****************

When will you back in the states? I don't have a budget for calls to Europe.

Rob Kall
Publisher _www.futurehealth.org
Publisher, _www.opednews.com, a technorati top 100 site overall _http://bit.ly/technoratitop100 (reaching 350-800,000+ unique visitors a month)
Host, The Rob Kall Bottom-Up Radio Show 1360 AM, reaching metro Philly & S. Jersey _www.opednews.com/podcasts
Host, The Rob KallFuturehealth Radio Show 1360 AM, reaching metro Philly & S. Jersey _www.futurehealth.org/podcasts
Writer, _Huffingtonpost.com
Consultant/trainer in Bottom-Up new media
211 N. Sycamore St. Newtown, PA 18940
215-504-1700, fax 215-860-5374
Follow me on twitter at www.twitter.com/robkall
_www.twitter.com/opednews
_www.twitter.com/bottomupmind
_www.twitter,com/fhlt (futurehealth)
_www.facebook.com/rkall

I'm based in Europe, so unless you want to use Skype, we're out of luck. Alternatively, you can use email

I've dabbled with Skype.
Like I typed on my iphone earlier, our managing editors have been having a lot of discussion on the issue you raised and related things. The main message of your article is something we want to cover. Would the article work without the mention of the one guy who committed murder?

Yes. It was not relevant to the point of the article.

then, I encourage you to resubmit with a minor re-write, pulling that out.

Let me know when you submit it and I'll personally check it out.

The thing is, we have 40 volunteer editors-- some are more centrist, some are left wing radicals and truthers-- just like in the real world. It's sometimes the luck of the draw. But your persistence has started a conversation that will help us set some guidelines.

thanks,

Rob Kall

Ok. As I said previously, if you would seek to avoid unreasonable censorship at OEN, it makes little sense to have someone who openly dismisses the idea of government conspiracies as 'mental illness' reviewing an article that argues for government conspiracy.

What point is there in even submitting such an article to such a person?

like I said. let me know when you submit it and I'll shepherd it through.
We're going to be working with Richmond to get the site policy clearer for him to understand.

While several senior editors are definitely into 911 questions, thought not necessarily truthers, including myself, our policy is to be tough on conspiracy articles-- expecting solid documentation and support and new information. We've been buried again and again with same old same old stories from people who just discovered the situation and decided that their article is the first.

Rob Kall

I understand, but that was clearly not the case with my article. It was an opinion piece, backed up by evidence, suggesting that the recent McCain Lieberman bill was being 'helped' by a sudden influx of 'homegrown terrorist' stories in the mainstream press.

I have resubmitted.

Just to be sure. You removed reference to the person who became a murderer?

Otherwise, looks okay to me. A take I hadn't considered for the latest-- Jihad Jane.

Rob Kall

And that was the end of it. Based on previous dealings with him, I'm rather suspect of Kall. At best he is, IMO, interested in money and attention, a tendency which often leads to the worst case scenario.

 

[Rabelais]

Percival, I have noticed that OpEd is editorially all over the place. I've read pieces that were pure shameless disinfo or establishment talking points, and later I'll read posts that are quite objective. The inconsistencies are glaring. Perhaps 40 non-collinear editors is not such a good idea, eh?

Did they ever publish your edited submission?

 

[Joe]

Percival, I have noticed that OpEd is editorially all over the place. I've read pieces that were pure shameless disinfo or establishment talking points, and later I'll read posts that are quite objective. The inconsistencies are glaring. Perhaps 40 non-collinear editors is not such a good idea, eh?

Did they ever publish your edited submission?

Yeah they did. I thought it was a rather interesting about-face by Kall though. He starts out attacking and within the space of a few exchanges, he's about to suggest I join their editorial team!

 

[Niall]

You will find numerous articles against Israel and zionism on Rob Kall's website.

That, right there, is a lie. Rob Kall does not even allow the word "Zionism" to appear on his website! If you have this keyword in your submission, Op-Ed HQ is alerted and your work becomes "subject to review". They rarely OK anything remotely critical of Israel.

 

[Laura]

Looks like the bottom line is that Rady Ananda and Rob Kall both come off looking like either conscious disinfo agents or just whackos looking for followers. I think the latter is more likely though it does often happen that such types get picked up by "agencies" and get paid a bit through some seemingly legit organization to do what they do anyway.