Vincent Bridges, Jay Weidner and Gang - Web Pathology


Padawan Learner
http:(double slash)www(dot)maar(slash)laura_knight_jadczyk(dot)html

I don't know if the team are aware of this article, but I thought I'd post it because it's been doing the rounds, so to speak, on other forums and I wondered if there was ever a response to such a nasty article full of subjective comments and conjecture. Is she part of the bridges gang? She claims to have met Laura.

ADMIN NOTE: changed subject title to better reflect content.


The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Colleen Johnston and Vincent Bridges Trash Laura and cassiopaea

Yes, I've seen it before. Interesting that it comes up so high on the Google list rankings (surprised they haven't put it first!). Pretty poor piece of work.


The Living Force
Colleen Johnston and Vincent Bridges Trash Laura and cassiopaea

I love how the author claims "extensive research" when in fact, he hasn't even read the website... If he had bothered to parouse the wave articles she has posted he would realize a shit-ton of inconsistencies. If even any of the trash he talks was true i wouldn't be here... ::feels insulted::

I mean - how does this even classify as a cult? It's an open forum for sharing information... thats it. ::growls::


Colleen Johnston and Vincent Bridges Trash Laura and cassiopaea

Those are some pretty serious accusations.

The article is dated from 2004, so perhaps it was addressed, but it's the first time I ever saw it. To tell the truth, it is enough to scare most people off or at least seriously bias them if that is what they get to first. It sounds very much like something a fundamentalist Christian would write. Quite poisonous, and at least regarding the views on channeling, "disaster scenarios" and allusions to "death cults", quite irrational.
Colleen Johnston and Vincent Bridges Trash Laura and cassiopaea

"The Liars Seminar" One could study this "piece of work" as an example of how a grain of truth is twisted and distorted, sometimes subtley and sometimes not, to trash the intended victims. Anyone that believes the lies also becomes a victim. One doesn't learn how to lie this way overnight. It takes practice and plenty of malice aforethought in my opinion. This is the type of serious lying and deception that all truth seekers and those working to be honest persons are up against continuously on a massive scale, IMHO.Those that think they take the high moral ground and blindly choose to believe that, "the truth lies somewhere in the middle," in most cases, falls right into the hands of liars such as this. This is a good example of why we all need to understand psycopathy to the best of our ability. It is only by knowing the beast inside and out that we can effectively counteract it, and help others to do so as well.


FOTCM Member
Colleen Johnston and Vincent Bridges Trash Laura and cassiopaea

Yes, it has been addressed, and no, this woman has never met me. Yes, she is part of the Bridges COINTELPRO gang.

If you would like to hear the radio show that I did that she "heard" and which galvanized her to attack me (not to mention her military connections and her close relationship with Vincent Bridges) go HERE.

Funny that this comes up again so soon. It really is vicious and the psychopath really does have "secret knowledge" of the psychology of the normal human. I wrote about this in another forum recently, not this specific individual, but the general gang spreading this filth.

Laura said:
esoquest said:
As for the "scratch" test, just writing as you do is a scratch for most psychotics. That is one level. Other psychotics or latent psychotics of both leader and follower varieties can, however, fly under the initial radar by performing their own "corrections" upon the information. However, maintaining a facade (even if they convince themselves that they believe it) is highly stressful for even the most covert psychotics when their needs are not consistently met. Eventually, they will crack. Understanding this dynamic is very important for damage control among other things.
This is oh, so true. Among the earliest experiences we had with our discussion groups was just this problem. I think it happened a dozen times or more in the past five years. And in nearly every case, once the individual was exposed, pretty much following the same dynamic as Durand (even to falling into a greater or lesser degree of verbal confusion), we would send them on their way with our blessings that they should make their own lives, their own websites, and promote their own ideas as they saw fit and leave us to ours. And, in nearly every case, no sooner had we had this bifurcation of ways, they went on the attack. It was the damndest thing I ever saw. We didn't attack them, we simple expressed the desire to be allowed to think our own thoughts, live according to our own lights, and congregate with others who were likeminded. That was IT! No big secret cult, no frauds, nothing but a wish to not have to include such as Durand in our discussions where endless time and energy was wasted just trying to deal with everyone of their twists and turns.

The thing that bugged us the most about this was our observation of such individuals after they had left our group. I never in my life witnessed such outright lies, distortions, twisted facts, declared with such absolute certainty that it literally disoriented us.

That was why we began to study the phenomenon.

Next you write:

It seems to me, a normal person sends out an energy signature the psychotic can recognize. I have seen this recognition many times where psychotics label others as placed on either side of the "with us or against us" line. This has nothing to do with disagreements or differences in opinion and ideology. It goes far deeper. In my view, healthy people need to learn to turn the tables on the psychotics, and part of immunity (again according to my own observations) is the conscious building of an energy signature that does not compute for the psychotic.

I cannot really find all the concepts to properly convey this, as I am still exploring it, but it has to do with maintaining unshakeable integrity, and a kind of energetic symmetric of centered but healthy conviction. The psychotic field seeks to influence through holes in personal integrity, which is why they love to use divide and conquer tactics, the promotion of guilt, doubt and fear. I understand Carlos Castaneda addresses the issue of dealing with petty tyrants among other things, but I also believe that for a normal person to be vulnerable to psychotic attack that person must have endured an already advanced undermining of the personal energy field through varied degrees of trauma and psychological stress imposed by more minor dealings with psychosis in family and society. (This basically includes everyone).

It is similar to what the elite is doing to human bodies through vaccinations, food toxins, chemtrails and other methods. Notice that they do not move unless they have at first weakened and undermined their intended victims, like a spider needing to sting its prey into paralysis before it begins consuming it.
This idea is something that has exercised me to no end. As recently as a week ago the issue came up again due to an experience I had that made it clear to me that I am NOT as immune as I would like to think I am. What is funny is that it seems Lobaczewski "sensed" something was wrong and wrote an email to me saying "I am uneasy, is something wrong?" I wrote him back last night a long description of the incident.

The short version is that I decided to deliberately expose myself to psychopathy, up close and personal. It was like a personal "test." Even though it seemed like, on the surface, that I was unaffected, within a day or so of this exposure, I noticed that my mind kept going back to the schizoidal psychopathic declarations.

Now, keep in mind that, in this case I am talking about, it is not someone who falls into schizoidal jabberwocky under pressure that can be easily discarded. No indeed, this individual is smooth, calm, uses lots of language that promotes himself as a great teacher, teacher of love and light, and so on. What is different is his plain, simple, and ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN declarations that are LIES. And I mean that I KNOW they are lies. I also know that HE knows they are lies. In other words, I know he is lying CONSCIOUSLY, and he does it with such sincerity, with such compelling certainty that it is staggering! And the lies are all about ME. One of the most bizarre of these lies is that I plagiarized my own autobiography!!!! I mean, that just FLOORS me!

So, to observe him operate, to observe him work on an innocent party, an individual who might even be thought reasonably critical, was quite amazing. Not a single one of the people under the spell of this psychopath has ever thought that it might be useful to ask my family or friends (many of whom read said volume before it was published for fact checking purposes) whether or not my autobiography is plagiarized or not. Or to ask me personally about anything. He makes a big issue about demanding that I answer a whole list of questions in public that cannot be answered in public because the answers include extremely personal information about private people that I have no intention of making public for their safety as well as my own.

But I KNOW all that. I know how spellbinders work, and how they always travel with a "Greek Chorus" even if they often create the image on the internet that there are more people following them than really are by playing different parts on message boards and "talking to themselves" half the time. It still works on gullible people. It's almost comical to observe because the writing styles give them away so easily.

As I said, after this hour or so of self-torture, I thought - well, that was easy! Three years ago I would have taken to my bed for days after reading such lies told about myself! Now I can read it and even chuckle at some of the more outlandish claims that people suck up like manna.

But something strange happened: I began to question myself. Not about the facts... but about reality itself. What got to me was, strangely enough, the "pity factor." Here was a small group of people just literally SCREAMING that I had hurt them!!! I had, in some way, destroyed their lives. They were wounded, damaged, looked to me for help and I just brazenly took advantage of them and cast them aside. That was one variation. Another variation was that I was destroying the minds of other human beings (possibly untold numbers) talking about Organic Portals, or psychopaths, propagating the C's material, etc.

So it wasn't the lies that were told about me personally (or my husband, or our group) that affected me. Since I knew with certainty that those were lies, I have documents and dozens of witnesses, and so on, that isn't even the issue. The issue was the question as to whether or not what I am doing hurts people or not.

So, I forgot the main rule: Do NOT consider anything produced out of schizoidal rants as an idea which I ought to consider in the context of my own convictions and reason.

In other words, at some level, as I repeatedly recalled to mind the words emerging from the apparently anguished rage of these individuals, I began to interpret them in a manner corresponding to my own nature.

And it was PITY that opened the door. I began to HURT for those people who claimed that I had hurt them.

It was all downhill from there.

I began to think: "well, if these people think I am so awful, maybe I am?!" And then I began to start looking
at myself and everything I had ever said and done in a very negative light. I began to wonder if someone like me - obviously so different from these other people - has a right to exist since my existence causes pain to others. How dare I come along and take their happy lives away from them by expecting them to do the very hard (admittedly so) work that is required to find something of truth? After all, if they are so happy believing lies, what right do I have to upset that apple cart and cause them pain?

Then things began to really deteriorate. After taking the thoughts that far, I began to question my own view of everything. I began to ask myself do you really KNOW what is the difference between good and evil? After all, if these people believe YOU are evil, maybe they are right and you are wrong. What right do you have to exist?

Now remember, I am falling into this state all the while knowing the FACTS that are incontrovertible that I can see they are lying about. What's more, I can see that they are lying CONSCIOUSLY.

But still, their declared pain has evoked pity in me and that pity was the spider's web. Something mysterious began to act on my mind in a strange way and the result was that I found myself feeling exactly as though
I had no right to do anything, to want anything, no right to ask for anything, no right to live even. Everything I had ever done had done nothing but hurt other people. All these people were hurt, they were all
screaming out loud how I had hurt them, and obviously such a person as myself ought to just do the right thing and go out behind the barn and shoot myself and save the world further misery.

It took me about four days to come out of it. It was like falling into a black hole of despair and self doubt and self-accusation. It was slow and insidious, like poison.

So, it seems that I'm pretty good with dealing with the intellectual side of it, but when the pity ploy comes along, I'm still the world's biggest sucker. The instant I think that someone has been hurt by me or by something I have done, even inadvertently, I am almost drowning in suffering.

It lasted about four days. The time previous to that, about 8 months ago, involved someone close to me who was subverted by this filth. In THAT case, it was a lot worse. I ended up with a herniated cervical disc that took two months to heal.

What to do? How to make oneself not only intellectually immune, but also emotionally immune?
As I said, I don't even think that Colleen Johnston wrote this piece because we already have Jay Weidner on record saying that Bridges wrote defamatory articles about us and signed Weidner's name to them. The question as to why Weidner allowed this (did Bridges have something he wanted?) is interesting. Anyway, I am not sure that Colleen wrote the article herself because it has the "style" and flavor of Vincent Bridges. You can read about Bridges here:

and you can see the stack of paper on the subject we have, though there are things we cannot publish or talk about because of legal restrictions:

I can say that we do have evidence that Bridges spent a few years in a mental hospital, but we cannot get an affidavit on that because those kinds of records are restricted in the U.S. If a criminal trial was going on, there is the possibility that a prosecutor could obtain the records, but as private individuals, we could not.

The unique ability of psychopaths to induce psychological disintegration in a normal person is their most powerful weapon. A person has to have an extremely strong mind to resist this invasion of the personality. I admit that when I read the long and detailed stories that Bridges writes about me on the internet that I come away wondering if I am the horrible person he depicts. Even when I KNOW that what he is saying is either completely lies or truth so twisted out of context that it is - for all intents and purposes a lie, I have to fight to keep my mind from falling into a pit.

Let me give you an example. Two years ago I wrote an email to casschat sharing with them the details of our visit to Marseille when Ark went there to work with a scientific colleague/friend. We were invited as guests of the Institution and we stayed in the guest facility. We ate in the guest dining room, and we took a couple of excursions while there. On the day before we left, our friends took us out in their boat for a little cruise around the bay and to an island off Marseille for dinner.

That was the sum and substance of the email. I was just sharing the story of our recent trip and what we did and saw with casschat members. All pretty normal, wouldn't you say?

Well, a few days later it appeared on Vincent Bridges website (he had been a disguised member of casschat). HIS description of it was that our "cult followers were being fleeced to pay for luxury vacations and cruises in the Mediterranean."

Now, as you probably have guessed by now, the only thing WE paid for was our fuel to get to Marseille and back and I had to pay for my meals. (Ark's were provided.) So where does the "luxury vacation and cruise" come from?

Didn't stop Bridges from creating an entire myth by twisting and distorting facts.

On another occasion, in Florida, Ark gave a presentation for a research project to a man representing several businessment who were interested in investing in energy research. This showed up on Bridges website as "Ark Jadczyk, the cold-war nuke scientist trying to con a rich man out of his money." (Words to that effect.)

Now, money: Bridges and his gang have made money such an issue that it surely must be the chief thing they want to make sure we don't have so that we can never do any effective research. They keep ranting that Ark should "get a regular job." To their minds, a "regular job" is driving a truck or putting cans on the shelf in the supermarket.

Well, of course that isn't in in their minds, but they know that the people they are hoping to hook are dumbed down truck drivers, bag boys, waitresses, ect. So they play the "get a real job" card and for people who think that academic research is just a cushy way to make money and do very little, it really grabs them and they say "Yeah, what's that guy doing racking his brains 16 hours a day, 7 days a week! What does he think he's doing? Trying to solve the mysteries of the universe? How dare he!"

And so on.

Everyone who knows us is aware how hard Ark works. They are aware of how hard I work. And the SOTT team as well. We generally put in 16 hours a day, every day - all of us. Ark works under his research grants, the SOTT team and I write and live on our book sales income.

Now tell me, please, what is abnormal or "cultish" or even illegal about any of that?

But to read Colleen and Bridges, you would think that we are the most evil and conniving and fraudulent human beings on the planet.

Hundreds of people who know us personally know better. They know us and interact with us. As I said, I have NEVER met Colleen Johnston, who claims to be an expert on me and my affairs, and I have only met Bridges twice, and both times he was trying to con me. I refused to be conned, I refused to give him the rights to my books, and he went on the attack and has done everything in his power to destroy me ever since.

It has been a horrible, almost unbearable experience. I have spent a small fortune on doctors just to deal with the stress.

It has been absolutely unbelievable and even soul destroying to me to have people who know me and who also KNEW the facts to be taken in by Bridges and his lies - and it HAS happened. Believe it or not!

What it comes down to is that I am not to be allowed a private life at all. The only way that I see that I can defend myself is to publish every single private detail of my life, including my bank statements, my tax returns, deeds to all properties I might own, and so on and so forth and that is perfectly ridiculous. How many of you reading this would be willing to do that?

I think that is a horrible state of affairs - that a person has to spend all their time defending themselves from such attacks - just to continue to work at what interests them. It's even worse considering the nature of that specific work and how much benefit it has brought to other people.

But let me back up a bit.

The whole COINTELPRO thing didn't start with Vinnie Bridges. It started out being the UFO crowd types. Back in 1993, I was a firm non-believer in any such thing. I had the idea it was a sort of attention getting hysteria. I had read Streiber's book, was extremely disturbed by it, and immediately began to formulate a reasonable hypothesis based on theories of mind that explained it all away. I referred to it as "the millennial disease."

Then, in August of 1993, my children and I experienced a sighting right over our own house. Again, I tried to explain it away with "rational" theories. The only problem was that I suffered from symptoms of something like radiation poisoning for about six months afterward. This included, as time went by, about half my hair falling out which has never come back. (It's okay, it was so thick I still have plenty, just isn't what it used to be.) My dog died from a mysterious wasting illness within three months of the sighting, and my children experienced some bizarre psychological effects that took a number of years to stabilize (and I'm not sure that they have completely.)

That shocked me profoundly and set me off on my search for answers.

I had been doing hypnotherapy for about 19 years at that point, and had never encountered anyone who claimed to have experienced an alien abduction, so it was a surprise to me that suddenly they were just crawling out of the woodwork. I was determined to prove my "theory of mind" hypothesis, or even that such ideas related to suppression of early abuse, but that fell flat, to put it mildly. The only good thing was that, since I was not indoctrinated into the "aliens are here to save us, they are GOOD" ideas, but rather had a more prosaic approach, the information that came from my clients was not influenced by me trying to help them retrieve memories that promoted such an agenda.

One case that came along (synchronistically, wouldn't ya know?) was one that I thought could be investigated scientifically. Since I had a friend who was an ex-cop turned Private Eye with connections to police labs, and there WAS alleged physical evidence, I decided to take the client to him, treat the matter as a crime (rape, abduction, etc) and do a thorough forensic investigation.

There was a MUFON investigator involved on the periphery, and as soon as he got wind of this, all hell broke loose. That was when the first attacks began.

This man (the MUFON guy) went around telling everyone that I was "using this client" as a "ticket to fame and glory" and my plans to do a real investigation were "criminal" because the poor woman was so traumatized that she just needed to be "understood" and not pawed over by a bunch of government agents. Of course, by this he meant that if the evidence was turned over to a police lab, this would happen and the evidence would very likely disappear etc.

Well, the fact was that there was NO plan to inform the police lab techs that there was anything "unusual" about the samples they were supposed to extract from the clothing. It was to be presented to them as a straight rape/abduction.

I was shocked beyond anything at these accusations. From my point of view, I wanted to know one thing and one thing only, and I believed that it was crucial for the client to know this also, and that was: was it a real abduction? Did something physical happen? Once that was established, then a proper therapeutic model could be mapped for her. After all, from my point of view, we needed to know if she was imagining things, and if so why, or if something REAL had happened.

Needless to say, this MUFON guy grabbed onto the poor woman, convinced her I was just going to use her, that she should refuse to submit her evidence to me, that instead, she should give it to HIM. He was, after all, a REAL MUFON "investigator."

By this time, I had about three sessions with the woman under hypnosis. The last session, I had my private eye friend present to advise about questions that ought to be asked for forensic purposes. I should mention that she showed up for this last session with bruises on her arms and legs that looked like they had been made with 3 finger hands - very strange. Under hypnosis, she claimed to have been abducted by the military. I later learned that she had been out the night before with the MUFON guy, wining and dining and possibly even engaging in hanky panky.

Well, anyway, the MUFON guy gathered a group of people together and the defamation began on a local scale. The poor woman, under pressure from this group, withdrew from the plan to do a complete investigation and instead, handed her evidence over to the MUFON guy. The last I heard, they shook the dress out over a shower curtain and found a couple of fibers which one of the other MUFON people, a water tester at a local waste water recycling plant, attempted to do some "experiments" on in the water lab.

I was totally disgusted with the whole thing. I was disgusted with MUFON, with the whole UFO/Alien crowd and wanted nothing more to do with any of them ever again. What a bunch of LUNATICS.

But, I did have enough material from a number of so-called "alien abductees" to begin thinking about things. I started reading everything I could get my hands on, writing to people, calling people, trying to find out if what my clients had said had any correlation to anything anybody else had found. What I discovered was that the whole field had been pretty much taken over by crazy people who just wanted to believe in the "space brothers" and utilizing any scientific principles in gathering and assessing evidence was NOT part of their agenda.

Because I had a couple of friends in MUFON who were not associated with this other nutcase, I was invited to give a talk at one of their meetings. I was going to present the evidence I had thus far collected, as well as talk about what I had learned about my own sighting. Originally, I was alotted an hour to speak, but at the last minute, my time was cut to 15 minutes - probably due to the defamation of the MUFON "investigator." (He later turned out to be a complete fraud, by the way, but that's another story.)

Still, because of this talk, I was contacted by Tom French from the St. Pete Times who then began to hang out with me for about 5 years. He, too, was interested in the whole thing and whether or not anything real was happening. Now, keep in mind that this man spent FIVE YEARS following me around, talking to everyone I knew, talking to clients, friends, family, doing background investigations, and everything.

Because the rumor went around that the St. Pete Times was taking an interest in what I was doing, there were bouquets and daggers. Along with some death threats by anonymous phone calls, there were also a number of invitations to speak at various gatherings. I did a few, and basically I was presenting my thoughts about the phenomenon based on the data I had collected along with what I had obtained from my clients, and the picture was not as rosy as the people who believed in the Space brothers would have us think.

After a couple of such talks, the death threats got more threatening. I stopped talking to groups since it was just too much hassle to deal with all that nonsense AND continue researching.

In the meantime, of course, the Cass experiment had taken off and I was more interested in that anyway - at least for the moment.

So, I dropped out of sight for about a year and just continued to do research. (I was also in an auto accident and broke my neck and had to spend three days a week in therapy to get full use of my arms and legs back.)

During this time I was sharing a bit of the info with a few people - it's all a long story, much of it recounted in the Wave and Adventures Series. (But not everything.)

Things really started getting warm when we finally put a real website up in '98. Not long after, I started writing the Wave Series which was just recounting all my investigations and experiences and pretty much showing how completely corrupt and full of disinformation the whole New Age/UFO research field was.

This work attracted the attention of a guy named Ray Flowers who has this website:

He "introduced" me to Vincent Bridges via the net. Vincent seemed to be such a great guy, so knowledgable, so helpful...

But Vincent was - apparently - the "agent" being sent in to co-opt me, my discussion group, my work, etc. Only in retrospect do I realize this... He was supposed to associate me with some pretty nasty stuff so that I could be tarred with a nasty brush. I managed (because of C's, my husband and friends) to navigate my way out of that mess. But, once I had escaped the clutches of the guy and foiled those plans, (which I later learned are typical COINTELPRO) then the next level of cointelpro was activated: libel, defamation, fake emails, the whole nine yards.

I was accused, (with my husband) of trying to start a cult, of fleecing "cult members" of really absurd things like promoting suicide... That last one is actually so bizarre as to be incomprehensible to me. I have a favorite saying "We ain't gonna get out of this life alive, so we might as well make the best of it and do everything we can to leave the world a better place when we are gone..." Somehow, that saying got twisted to "We ain't gonna get out of this alive..." leaving off the rest of it, the meaning attributed to me that we ought to all commit suicide!!!!

One of my favorites is that I "plagiarized" my autobiography!!!!

Well, things just got worse and worse as time went by. More death threats. My dog (offspring of the one that had died after the UFO sighting) was poisoned and died, my oldest daughter was run off the road three times by what seemed to be "road rage" infected lunatics. The third time resulted in a serious accident that totaled her car. My second daughter was poisoned at a gathering of kids and spent three days on life support, nobody thought she would live; our names and addresses were posted on an ADL group (the anti- Semitism label was being widely used by Bridges and his cohorts), and it was suggested that anyone in our area should "take care of us," and on and on and on. False police reports were filed against us for abusing our children (thankfully, the police chief in our town knew us and just warned us that this was being done) and so on. Bridges called Tom French to repeat his filth to him. Tom wrote and told me about it. We complained to the FBI, the FDLE, etc etc. The special agent for FDLE told me on the phone that they could do nothing because it was "out of their jurisdiction," since it was being done from another state. He then suggested that if I didn't like what was being done to me that I ought to stop doing what I was doing that set Bridges off!!! In other words, Bridges could do whatever he liked, including filing false police reports, stalking, harassment, defamation, libel, slander, coercion, etc... and their answer was: well, "give in to him."

My husband was working for DoD and they were pushing to have him naturalized so he could get sucked into their secret projects...

George Bush was banging the war drum and I was already doing the signs page and getting hate mail for that almost every day.

Vincent Bridges had a whole website defaming me that actually made me deathly ill at one point.

So, we just said: this is TOO much, we are outta here.

Well, I made a big mistake at that point. Since we were in a hurry to leave (for obvious reasons) and we needed to sell our house as fast as possible, we decided to raffle it off rather than risk taking 6 months or a year to sell it. The raffle was a huge failure since we didn't even get half of the money to pay off the mortgage (it wasn't a very big one either!) So, we borrowed on our credit cards to make up the difference, our readers and discussion group members pooled enough cash to help us move, we picked a winner, left the checks and power of attorney with a local attorney and our neighbor to handle the transfer of the house (that was the mistake part) and left.

Serious barriers seemed to have been put in the way of the winner taking possession of the house. There were taxes that had to be paid based on the value of the house and instead of helping this person to take care of that, (which could have been done), our representatives apparently made it an insuperable obstacle and that meant that the winner had to be disqualified. Then the situation seems to have been a battle between the atty and the neighbor for possession of the house. Keep in mind that both of them had our contact details but neither of them contacted us about this asking what should they do and they, themselves, did nothing except try to outwait the other so that the house would go into foreclosure and one of them could pick it up at auction for 10 cents on the dollar.

We were, by this time, settling in France and thinking that everything was all sorted out. By the time we learned what was going on, it was already a disaster and we could do absolutely nothing about it. We had already had to pay double to get our household goods delivered after they were held-hostage by a Jewish moving company so we were broke.

In the middle of all this, a woman called me from Florida one night and said she wanted the house and even needed it badly. I told her the situation and explained that if she wanted it she would have to get an attorney and fight for it, that whatever she proposed I would agree to.

So, she put her attorney on the problem, came up with a plan and went in, made an offer with her attorney behind her, and the crooked jerk we left with our POA had no choice but to transfer the house to her because I was agreeing to everything she wanted - including a price that was half the value of the house. At this point, it was necessary because the checks we had left to pay off the note were now no longer valid since it was past 90 days.

So, basically, we lost our shirts in more ways than one, and between the people we left to handle this simple transaction and the movers who held up all our goods for two months, we ended up looking like we had deliberately pulled a "fast one" when nothing could have been further from the truth. I'm pretty sure that any reasonable person can see why I simply chose not to discuss it any further because, by this time, there were innocent people involved (the people who got the house) as well as not-so-innocent people that I could do nothing about whatsoever. They covered their tracks well.

Going back to the point in time when we left the U.S. Two months after we arrived in France, we pulled out whole website down. I wanted to change the focus so that we would quit attracting the lunatic fringe UFO true believer types. I also wanted to see what would happen on the cointelpro front if we simply "disappeared." Sure enough, the minute the website was gone, they thought they had accomplished their job and all the defamation about us was taken down and it was as though we had never existed.

Then, we began to restore the site section by section. I wrote the "MOSSAD and Moving Companies" article and put it up and things went crazy again. Jay Weidner, friend and co-author of a totally ridiculous book about Fulcanelli with Vincent Bridges bought a website "" and put up a whole twisted, sickening, defamatory "story of my life." Back again were the "cult" accusations, the "drink the kool aid" nonsense, and now, the "House raffle fraud" ... We were accused of fleecing the public of between 100 K and half a million dollars. (A complete lie. All my records have been audited and, as I said, we lost our shirts. When the report is completed, it will be published.) It was announced by Bridges with great certainty that the FBI were after us, I was a sick victim of child abuse, my children were abused, I had "entrapped" my husband, I was an alcoholic (I was a teetotaler for 25 years), I was an "attempted murderer" and just about every sick thing that could ever be said about a person was written by Vincent Bridges and Jay Weidner - close friends of Jeff Rense and Ray Flowers (though I didn't know that at the time.)

Jeff invited me to speak on his show because Richard Sauder wrote a favorable article about the C's and the MOSSAD article. So, Vincent and Jay launched an attack against Richard too...

I don't think I have ever seen Rense invite someone else to speak on his show and then, at the same time, publish defamatory articles about them. We had to threaten legal action... and got a lame excuse. "Oh, he hadn't read it, he just trusted Weidner... so sorry... "

I've left out a LOT of stuff here. But now, to answer the central question in short: Vincent Bridges, Jay Weidner, Colleen Johnston, Jeff Rense, are the central players in the "Third Party Attack" protocol that appears to be completely disconnected from any gov agency. BUT, when you begin to dig into their backgrounds and connections, you find that it is not as simple as it appears on the surface. We have several researchers who have been mapping these relationships and the network of COINTELPRO is absolutely astonishing.

And that's about as short as I can make the whole story. Fourteen years of pure hell just to be able to tell the truth as I see it. There seems to be no escaping from the horror of being stalked by those monsters. I fully expect my words written here to appear tomorrow or the next day on one of Bridges' sites or some forum where he holds court, twisted out of all recognition, embellished, declamations being made, and so on. So, I'll finish this off with what Lobaczewski wrote to me about that after I wrote to him to describe what had happened to me.

Laura said:
I said:
This idea is something that has exercised me to no end. As recently as a week ago the issue came up again due to an experience I had that made it clear to me that I am NOT as immune as I would like to think I am. What is funny is that it seems Lobaczewski "sensed" something was wrong and wrote an email to me saying "I am uneasy, is something wrong?" I wrote him back last night a long description of the incident.
Thought I would share the exchange with Lobaczewski that resulted from this incident (along with a few comments):

Lobaczewski said:
Rzeszów, thursday, 2. March 2006

Dear Madame Laura.

Thank you for your long and sincere letter of 24 February. It permits me to be a little bit helpful for you.

The experiences with your persecutors and your own responses are calling to my mind the very similar, we passed many years ago during the time of compulsory "ideological indoctrination". Please also read this again. (page 144 in the pre-print) Then take an attitude of a naturalist and study, in a objective way, the typical responses of a psychopathic personality to your activieties. It will render you more immune in result.
Here I will insert the passage Lobaczewski refers to:

Ponerology said:
May the reader please imagine a very large hall in some old Gothic university building. Many of us gathered there early in our studies in order to listen to the lectures of outstanding philosophers. We were herded back there the year before graduation in order to listen to the indoctrination lectures which recently had been introduced.

Someone nobody knew appeared behind the lectern and informed us that he would now be the professor. His speech was fluent, but there was nothing scientific about it: he failed to distinguish between scientific and everyday concepts and treated borderline imaginations as though it were wisdom that could not be doubted.

For ninety minutes each week, he flooded us with naive, presumptuous paralogistics and a pathological view of human reality. We were treated with contempt and poorly controlled hatred. Since fun poking could entail dreadful consequences, we had to listen attentively and with the utmost gravity.

The grapevine soon discovered this person's origins. He had come from a Cracow suburb and attended high school, although no one knew if he had graduated. Anyway, this was the first time he had crossed university portals, as a professor, at that!

"You can't convince anyone this way!" we whispered to each other. "It's actually propaganda directed against themselves." But after such mind-torture, it took a long time for someone to break the silence. We studied ourselves, since we felt something strange had taken over our minds and something valuable was leaking away irretrievably. The world of psychological reality and moral values seemed suspended as if in a chilly fog. Our human feeling and student solidarity lost their meaning, as did patriotism and our old established criteria. So we asked each other, "are you going through this too"? Each of us experienced this worry about his own personality and future in his own way. Some of us answered the questions with silence. The depth of these experiences turned out to be different for each individual.

We thus wondered how to protect ourselves from the results of this "indoctrination". Teresa D. made the first suggestion: Let's spend a weekend in the mountains. It worked. Pleasant company, a bit of joking, then exhaustion followed by deep sleep in a shelter, and our human personalities returned, albeit with a certain remnant. Time also proved to create a kind of psychological immunity, although not with everyone.

Analyzing the psychopathic characteristics of the "professor's" personality proved another excellent way of protecting one's own psychological hygiene.

You can just imagine our worry, disappointment, and surprise when some colleagues we knew well suddenly began to change their world-view; their thought-patterns furthermore reminded us of the "professor's" chatter. Their feelings, which had just recently been friendly, became noticeably cooler, although not yet hostile. Benevolent or critical student arguments bounced right of them. They gave the impression of possessing some secret knowledge; we were only their former colleagues, still believing what those professors of old had taught us. We had to be careful of what we said to them. Our former colleagues soon joined the Party.

Who were they, what social groups did they come from, what kind of students and people were they? How and why did they change so much in less than a year? Why did neither I nor a majority of my fellow students succumb to this phenomenon and process? Many such questions fluttered through our heads then.

Those times, questions, and attitudes gave rise to the idea that this phenomenon could be objectively understood, an idea whose greater meaning crystallized with time. Many of us participated in the initial observations and reflections, but most crumbled away in the face of material or academic problems. Only a few remained; so the author of this book may be the last of the Mohicans.

It was relatively easy to determine the environments and origin of the people who succumbed to this process, which I then called "transpersonification". They came from all social groups, including aristocratic and fervently religious families, and caused a break in our student solidarity to the order of some 6 %.

The remaining majority suffered varying degrees of personality disintegration which gave rise to individual efforts in searching for the values necessary to find ourselves again; the results were varied and sometimes creative.

Even then, we had no doubts as to the pathological nature of this "transpersonification" process, which ran similar but not identical in all cases. The duration of the results of this phenomenon also varied. Some of these people later became zealots. Others later took advantage of various circumstances to withdraw and re-establish their lost links to the society of normal people. They were replaced. The only constant value of the new social system was the magic number of 6 %.

We tried to evaluate the talent level of those colleagues who had succumbed to this personality-transformation process, and reached the conclusion that on average, it was slightly lower than the average of the student population. Their lesser resistance obviously resided in other bio-psychological features which were most probably qualitatively heterogeneous.

I had to study subjects bordering on psychology and psychopathology in order to answer the questions arising from our observations; scientific neglect in these areas proved an obstacle difficult to overcome. At the same time, someone guided by special knowledge apparently vacated the libraries of anything we could have found on the topic.

Analyzing these occurrences now in hindsight, we could say that the "professor" was dangling bait over our heads, based on the psychopaths's above-mentioned specific psychological knowledge. He knew in advance that he would fish out amenable individuals but the limited numbers disappointed him.

The transpersonification process generally took hold whenever an individual's instinctive substratum was marked by pallor or some deficits. To a lesser extent, it also worked among people who manifested other deficiencies, also the state provoked within them was partially impermanent, being largely the result of psychopathological induction.

This knowledge about the existence of susceptible individuals and how to work on them will continue being a tool for world conquest as long as it remains the secret of such "professors". When it becomes skillfully popularized science, it will help nations develop immunity. But none of us knew this at the time.

Nevertheless, we must admit that in demonstrating the properties of pathocracy in such a way as to force us into in-depth experience, the professor helped us understand the nature of the phenomenon in a larger scope than many a true scientific researcher participating in this work in one way or another.
Now, back to Lobaczewski's letter:

Lobaczewski said:
Their furies are to be understand as the symptomatical responses. For them you are the worst enemy. You are hurting them very painfully. For a psychopath, revealing his real condition, tearing down his Cleckley-mask, brings the end of his self-admiration. You are threating them with destroying of their secret world, and bring to null their dreams of ruling and introducing their best social system possible. When his real condition is publicly revealed, a psychopath feels like a wounded animal. In such conditions, suicidal thoughts are common among them.

To defend themselves they are using all the possibilities that nature endowed them with. The unusual creativity of suggestive innuendos, new catchwords and so on, they employ is their typical way. (Look page 167). Therefore, such aggession could be readily foreseen! And so you have an opportunity to study this phenomenon of psychopathic nature.
Again, I will insert the relevant passage that Lobaczewski has indicated:

Ponerology said:
Psychopaths are conscious of being different from the world of normal people. That is why the "political system" inspired by their nature conceals an awareness of being different. When we just observe the role of ideology in this macrosocial phenomenon, quite conscious of the existence of this specific awareness, we understand why ideology is relegated to a tool-like role: something useful in dealing with those other naive people and nations. Pathocrats must nevertheless appreciate the function of ideology as being something essential in any ponerogenic group, especially in the macrosocial phenomenon which is their "homeland". This factor of awareness simultaneously constitutes a certain qualitative difference between the two above-mentioned relationships. They know their real ideology derived from their deviant natures, and treat the "other" with barely concealed contempt.

A well-developed pathocratic system thus no longer has a clear and direct relationship to its original ideology, which it only keeps as its primary, traditional tool for action. For practical purposes of pathocratic expansion, other ideologies may be useful, even if they contradict the main one and heap moral denunciation upon it. However, these other ideologies must be used with care, refraining from official acknowledgement within environments wherein the original ideology appears overly foreign, discredited, and useless.

The main ideology succumbs to symptomatic deformation, in keeping with the characteristic style of this very disease and with what has already been stated about the matter. The names and official contents are kept, but another different content is insinuated underneath, thus giving rise to the well-known double talk phenomenon within which the same names have two meanings: one for initiates, one for everyone else. The latter is derived from the original ideology; the former has a specifically pathocratic meaning, something which is known not only to the pathocrats themselves, but also to those people living under long-term subjection to their rule.

Doubletalk is only one of many symptoms. Others are the specific facility for producing new names which have suggestive effects and are accepted virtually uncritically, in particular outside the immediate scope of such a system's rule. We must thus point out the para-moralistic character and paranoidal qualities frequently contained within these names. The action of paralogisms and paramoralisms in this deformed ideology becomes comprehensible to us based on the information presented in Chapter IV. Anything which threatens pathocratic rule becomes deeply immoral. This also applies to the concept of forgiving the pathocrats themselves; it is extremely dangerous and thus "immoral".
Back again to the letter:

Lobaczewski said:
Take also some pity for the psychopaths, but for yourself as well. Dose your activity properly and share it with other persons. Be conscious of this, that this is a world-wide problem, solving of which is a matter of a long time, of the whole our century, I believe. Do as much as you may, and do not face more trouble than you must and you may endure. Everyone needs some rest and enjoyment. It is your duty to be healthy!

The solving of this huge problem needs firstly a profound research in biological and psychological nature of such phenomena. Actual knowledge is still not sufficient for practical action. Then the popular lesson of psychology is to be introduced to shools, including the necessary information on psychopathies, and on the non-hereditary causes of mental abnormalities as well. This last is what I try to propagate in Poland. Really to nobody is given the joy to see the results of the toil of his life.

Let me pass the words of kind Regard and greetings for you and your Husband.

Truly yours,

Andrew Lobaczewski.
I wrote back as follows:

Laura said:
Subject: Re: A bit help Date sent:
Fri, 3 Mar 2006 15:45:28 +0100

Dear Professor,

Thank you for your kind words of support.

One question I have is: do you really think they actually feel "suicidal?" I'm trying to understand this because I have always understood suicide to be a consequence of great despair - emotional pain including self-doubt - which the psychopath does not ever experience.

You are describing it as a "wounded animal." Isn't it more like an animal whose attempt to kill another creature for dinner has been thwarted? If the crocodile doesn't eat the zebra, I don't think he feels like killing himself he just gets "smarter."

A friend of ours, a lawyer whose hobby is mathematics, had a cousin who was a patient of Cleckley and was diagnosed as a psychopath. This cousin eventually committed suicide. He has studied the subject deeply and he questions whether or not his cousin was, indeed, psychopathic.

Do you know of cases where a real, confirmed, psychopath has done this?

You say to have pity for the psychopath. Well, I am trying. But I find that I feel about them the same way I do about crocodiles. I don't want to do away with crocodiles, but I don't believe they should live among people.

In fact, after working my way through this recent "effect," I realized that the main issue was that I was moved to pity by these individuals and that pity is what triggered my own self-accusations. After all, these people were saying I had hurt them (even if I knew it to be lies) and above all things, I do not want to hurt anyone!

Thank you very much, and our best to you.

The response:

Lobaczewski said:
Rzeszów, Monday, March 6. 2006.

Is a crocodile really guilty that he is not born a chimpanzee? You are partly right finding some similarity of the essential psychopathy to the way of thought of a crocodile. They are somewhat mechanical. But, are they guilty, that they have inherited an abnormal gene, and their instinctive substratum is different from that of big majority of human population? Such person is not able to feel like we are doing, or to understand a person bearing a normal instinctive endowment. Please also to try to understand a psychopath, and take some pity for them. Limiting the role of psychopaths in ponerogenesis, particularly causing tragedies of women, and then gradually the number of their appearence is a real aim.

As in concern of the suicidal tendencies in psychopaths', it is a confused matter. They enjoy the life and "eating lot of meat." But putting them wise of their incorrectable abnormality is dangerous to the therapist and to themselves. It causes suicidal tendencies realized often by overuse of narcotics. Even with psychopathic prisoners, a psychologist must be circumspect.

Take as well in your consideration that in the whole pool of pathologic factors taking part in ponrogenesis, all kinds of psychopathies make up some less than a half of the total number. The pathologic conditions, usually not hereditary, are making more than the other half. Stalin was not a psychopath. He was a case of frontal characteropathy (Character disorder) due to the damage of frontal centers (10A&B) caused by a disease he experienced as a newborn. This produces the dramatically dangerous characters. I describe the role of such woman. (Page 83-86). Fortunately, the contemporary care for newborns' reduces such cases to a small part of appearence in early XX century, and to lighter cases.

With best greetings.

Andrew M. Lobaczewski
What really caught my eye in the above was this: Limiting the role of psychopaths in ponerogenesis, particularly causing tragedies of women, and then gradually the number of their appearence is a real aim.
Someone commented recently that the drive to overturn Roe vs Wade was a psychopathic maneuver to insure that more psychopaths would be born since women who had been raped would be forced to bear the children of violence.

A QFG member is working on an in-depth study of sexual violence against women and children and I have read some of the material. It strikes me that sexual predation may very well be a particular expression of psychopathy. I'm not saying that all sexual predators are psychopaths or that all psychopaths are sexual predators, but there is a very significant overlapping of the characteristics. VERY significant from what I have read. This leads back to the issue of so-called "Indigo Children." It seems to be a label designed to "shield" young psychopaths by grouping them with truly gifted children.

In short, the whole problem is pretty overwhelming when you think about it.
I should also note that I, as a woman, have been the particular target of Bridges and Gang. Yes, they will say all kinds of negative things about my husband, the SOTT team etc, but I am the main target. There is no limit to the filth and degradation that they subject me to. And sadly, that includes my children as well.

Note added later: I have posted the "antimatter fandom" article here not because I am particularly interested in the case it describes, nor because I know anything about that case or any of the individuals involved, but simply because it accurately describes the dynamic we have personally experienced with Vinnie Bridges, Colleen Johnston, Stormbear Williams, Terri Burns, and others.


The Living Force
Colleen Johnston and Vincent Bridges Trash Laura and cassiopaea

When they can't attack the content of the work or buy you off, they make it personal. That's what they have been doing to Laura for years. I knew about this stuff from reading Laura's writings, but, believe me, when you are personally involved, it takes on a whole new reality. I have had friends and family who have been contacted and told horror stories about my involvement in a cult. They have been used as the objects of threats, veiled and otherwise. Fortunately, they know me, they know Laura and Ark, they know some of the other members, and they had the good sense to ignore it.

And even if things worked out in the end, there is still the emotional shock when some stranger phones and starts telling lies about your child or parent or friend. There is that effect that the psychopath has over good people who cannot imagine that there are people whose conscious intent is to hurt. There is that impulse to think that the truth is somewhere "in the middle". That is the psychopath's weapon. We are bombarded with the notion that the truth of a situation is always "somewhere in the middle". But when one party is consciously lying, that is no longer the case. When one side is making things up, as in the stories Laura tells above, that "certainty" is a trap.

The psychopath counts on our "goodness" and twists and manipulates that goodness into something horrid and deformed.

We have to ask "Why?", why would someone, or some group, expend so much energy to destroy not only the life's work of someone, but to also destroy their private life as well? If people don't agree with Laura's ideas, they can ignore them. Many people do. What kind of pathological need can there be to get vicious and personal?

All Laura has ever been doing is trying to make available her research to others. She ain't in it for the money, because there is none, nor for the glory, because what she gets is infamy, threats, and attacks. She wants to give others the possibility to see the world through different eyes. And she is forcing her ideas on no one.

Why is that so dangerous that she must be destroyed? Why do they go so far as to attack her children? What kind of people would do that?

This forum is like our living room. The members are guests here, free to discuss amongst yourselves and with Laura, Ark, and other members of the Cass experiment. Would you take a box of excrement into someone's house as a gift?


The Force is Strong With This One
Colleen Johnston and Vincent Bridges Trash Laura and cassiopaea

Ben said:
Yes, I've seen it before. Interesting that it comes up so high on the Google list rankings (surprised they haven't put it first!). Pretty poor piece of work.
It is in first isn't it, it's been in first for over a year at least, give or take the occasional dip.
The very fact of it being so high in google rankings for a very amaturish web site, is worthy of a big question.

How does a two bit web site with no gizmos to push it up the ranking, get the number one slot?

How is it done?

Who benefites? ( aint Laura)

Narrows the field a bit doesn't it.

I think we all know from the above evidence that the site in question is a cointelpro damage limitation site and it likely has a massive price tag for whoever is forking out for it and it isn't likely to be the bit part player who's name is on the site. Though no doubt she's a friend of a friend of the friend who signed the executive order, to make sure it stays in the number one spot.


Jedi Master
FOTCM Member
Colleen Johnston and Vincent Bridges Trash Laura and cassiopaea

Ben said:
Yes, I've seen it before. Interesting that it comes up so high on the Google list rankings (surprised they haven't put it first!). Pretty poor piece of work.
Hi Ben,

I just did the same thing with Yahoo. A search on Laura Knight Jadczyk gave 25,800 returns. Now think about the number of people that visit the Signs Page daily and the number of related articles, (here is a listing just to give you an idea, and yet Colleen’s article shows up in 11th and 14th spot. While Vincent Bridges is in 20! This certainly smells of COINTELPRO to me.


M. Howard

Colleen Johnston and Vincent Bridges Trash Laura and cassiopaea

It's old stuff, but what's highly suspicious is that this -- er, can I say LIAR -- should always rise to the top of the rankings. Yes, both cream and scum always rise to the top, but it's never too difficult to discern one from the other.


The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Colleen Johnston and Vincent Bridges Trash Laura and cassiopaea

Well Google have certainly showed their true colours with this recent business in China, not that we ever expected otherwise. As EsoQuest mentioned, the primary function of this kind of work is so that people will see this first and it will bias them against serious study of Laura's and the QFS's work. I say this because nobody who has got to grips with this information beforehand would be fooled by such claims. What they probably haven't considered is that anyone who is prone to accept such obvious disinformation at face value and is unwilling to consider both sides, check facts, and be objective probably won't get much out of this site anyway.


Colleen Johnston and Vincent Bridges Trash Laura and cassiopaea

Inviting disgruntled former QFS members is going to get her real objective info.

Ok I'll drop the sarcasm.

I've read this before and it seems she has updated it since the last time or maybe I missed half of it then. It's was so illogical and slanted that I didn't bother to finish it then but I did this time. She seems to be the angry paranoid one who has to trash her guru or anyone remotely representative of the teacher figure. Maybe her former guru refused to be food for her.

You all may have seen it before but in speaking of Laura she writes:
"In my personal observation and because of living in the midst of a cult in my own past for about eight years, I found her mental instability to be verging on paranoid psychosis;"

I have to wonder how much she knows about mental instability and paranoid psychosis. She exhibits symptoms of psychological pathology in her writing and her analysis looks like projection to me. It reads like someone with personality disorders of the paranoid and obsessive compulsive type. She trashes highly regarded representative of a teacher image because she can’t help herself. She perceives the world in a manner that confirms her own thinking so no matter how irrational. Objective reality does not figure here because it would be even scarier than the gurus and cults she fears so much. She needs disgruntled former members and grifters like Vincent Bridges as much as they need her. It feeds and confirms their delusions.


Jedi Master
Colleen Johnston and Vincent Bridges Trash Laura and cassiopaea

I think that what the psychopath does is kind of like projection. S/he projects unto others what is inside themselves etc. They see with glasses that distort the truth and what is more pathological is that they want others to share their distorted notions as the truth. But of course their distortions are deliberate which is the case here. What is being done on this site clearly disturbs some people, organizations, etc. etc. So it means that you are on the right track but you should try to protect yourself as much as possible. I know it is not easy. Please do not doubt yourself. We all have sensitive buttons that others may push and it is very hard being immune to them sometimes. Maybe we cannot altogether change in this dimension but try to do our best. Not to be offended by what others talk about us - not to take it on ourselves - they are just projecting their characters- etc. That's quite a challenge at times.

The following is a collection of definitions of projection from orthodox psychology texts. In this system the distinct mechanism of projecting own unconscious or undesirable characteristics onto an opponent is called Freudian Projection.

* "A defense mechanism in which the individual attributes to other people impulses and traits that he himself has but cannot accept. It is especially likely to occur when the person lacks insight into his own impulses and traits."

* "The externalisation of internal unconscious wishes, desires or emotions on to other people. So, for example, someone who feels subconsciously that they have a powerful latent homosexual drive may not acknowledge this consciously, but it may show in their readiness to suspect others of being homosexual."

* "Attributing one's own undesirable traits to other people or agencies, e.g., an aggressive man accuses other people of being hostile."

* "The individual perceives in others the motive he denies having himself. Thus the cheat is sure that everyone else is dishonest. The would-be adulterer accuses his wife of infidelity."

* "People attribute their own undesirable traits onto others. An individual who unconsciously recognises his or her aggressive tendencies may then see other people acting in an excessively aggressive way."

* "Projection is the opposite defence mechanism to identification. We project our own unpleasant feelings onto someone else and blame them for having thoughts that we really have."


FOTCM Member
Colleen Johnston and Vincent Bridges Trash Laura and cassiopaea

aurora said:
The following is a collection of definitions of projection from orthodox psychology texts. In this system the distinct mechanism of projecting own unconscious or undesirable characteristics onto an opponent is called Freudian Projection.
Thank you for the concise and applicable breakdown. Sounds about right.

Another reader sent me the following that is also interesting:

Antimatter Fandom
By Heather S.

In his fine article, Baldknobber writes, "Anonymous Accusation: In recent years, Federal, state and local law enforcement bodies have started arresting and punishing people due to anonymous accusations. Now when you show up in court you have no right to know who has accused you of a crime. Without any chance of any repercussions, individuals, groups and organizations now commonly issue accusations to get revenge, gain unfair advantage, or simply because they were going on assumption rather than actually being witness. The right to know your accuser was a cornerstone of American justice; it created an environment which brought accountability to legal prosecution. Without it, people are now going to jail, being fined, and losing their children in civil disputes without ever knowing why."

And he is absolutely right. I would like, though, Jeff, to use this remarkable paragraph to jump in and enlighten your regular readers about anonymous accusation, a recent American phenomenon we must identify, ridicule and then finally crush to preserve our civil freedoms and way of life. It is a debilitating weapon of social intimidation that some on the internet have termed, "shooting out all the lights", but I like to call by other names. You see, by naming a phenomenon you seize control of it. And it's time to lock the controls down on this one.

I call it Antimatter Fandom: the new American No-See-Um-ocracy.


Antimatter Fandom is when a mentally disturbed person develops an obsession with an individual they do not know personally, but whom they hate intensely. The intensity of the psychiatrically disturbed person's obsession resembles fan lust for a celebrity: the Antimatter Fan is preoccupied day and night by the object of his backwards lust: he knows everything about you, he researches even more, he keeps records and details on you, will solicit pictures of you, and will eventually attempt personal contact with you. All of this behavior, however, is devoted to discrediting, smearing and violating your reputation.

Former President Bill Clinton, for example, has more Antimatter Fandom around him than any celebrity to recent date, and his wife former First Lady Hillary Clinton comes in an astoundingly close second. Antimatter Fandom first became apparent to me during the middle Nineties, in fact, during the Clinton Era, and exploded exponentially through the late Nineties, until now, where it is commonplace to be an ordinary person minding one's own business and then suddenly find oneself the object of someone else's virulent Antimatter Fandom the next day.

The object of the Antimatter Fan is to become personally intimate with you and change your life. It is your duty to prevent either of these from occurring. We do this by identifying the pathology and its perpetrator.
Antimatter Fandom has happened to people I know, it has happened to me three distinct times, and it is happening to ordinary people everywhere in all walks of life. One moment you're living your normal life; the next, a complete stranger has begun spreading vicious lies about you, spreading fan fiction they have created about you to their circle of little friends, and mounting a slander and libel campaign against you on a level previously reserved for Anita Bryant, the Clinton couple and Jesus Christ of Nazareth.

You, formerly ordinary person, suddenly find yourself having to consult lawyers, who are often barely even aware of what Antimatter Fandom is, psychiatrists to try to decipher for you the clearly disturbed mentality of the No See Ums who are generating your libelous new celebrity on a 24-hour round the clock basis, and publicists to try to counter the reckless lies being printed and spread about you with CNN ticker reliability.


There are certain similarities I have observed in the people who attract Antimatter Fandom.

Nine times out of ten they are highly independent people who evidence a genuine talent and are outspoken about it. Not those who hide their intelligence under a bushel, people who attract No See Ums and Antimatter Fandom are often outgoing, friendly, gregarious and popular with others. They generate charisma: that more than any other factor seems to be what angers the Antimatter Fan.

The Antimatter Celebrity attracts people and their admiration, and is often hard at work at something that arguably would improve human existence: the president who genuinely cares for low-income Americans; the outspoken woman lawyer who mentors younger women instead of competing with and undermining them; the Native American tribal leader trying to improve life on the reservation who gets smeared by the campaign of a counterfeit leader who isn't even Indian but wants to be; the freelance producer who bankrupts herself to provide science fiction fans with a new version of their long-defunct favorite British TV show at last; and in my case, the friend of that person who is going to see justice. These are the qualities of the people who most consistently attract Antimatter Fans and Celebrity. Jeff Rense is one of them.

But who are the people who hate them and start these smear campaigns? It's time to identify the smear tactitians, gang, because they're out there, and Rense has run into quite a few already just by generously running this site for us.


Have you ever been out in the yard working on a summer day, when suddenly it feels like a Rottweiler with glass needles for teeth bit down on a tender part of your skin someplace? You yell and snatch out your clothes where it bit you, and you peer closely so you can see the sucker that bit you, mash it, and annihilate it... but there's nothing there.

Hardy suburban lawn mowing men named these nuisances long ago, God Bless em, and what we now call these pests are NO SEE UMS: because when they bite you, and you look to see, you "no see um."

I call Antimatter Fans and other pests of the internet No See Ums for a reason. The people who love you to the point where they cross the line and begin to hate you, and then annoy the world by daring to go public with their lust, rely on three things the insect world also relies on to cause you maximum damage. Like the insects that are their namesakes, the No See Um needs three things to hurt you for making you love them, and hurt you for that BAD:

1. Invisible So You Can't See and Kill Them Instantly
2. A Big Painful Bite You Cannot Ignore or Pretend Didn't Happen
3. Stinging Multitudes Just Like Them To Come Bite Too

Let's take each one in sequence, shall we?


Karen McCoy was an idiot, yes, because she opened her mouth and became visible to hordes of Doctor Who fans. But she had a certain history in Hollywood, there are producers and film people who know her, and she was therefore visible. She was a de facto ex-Hollywood industry person, so she had the right to do what she was doing and say what she was saying. But Audra McHugh, the lovable Doctor Who fan who defamed and smeared her out of the clear blue one sunny August morning in 1997, was small. Insignificant to the point of invisible. She was, incredibly, only a web designer at a non-profit children's marching band organization called Winterguard International.

Boy, that's real Hollywood, ain't it?

Hollywood didn't know who she was, still doesn't know, and doesn't care. But the No See Um has no sense of figure and ground, no sense of propriety, and no sense of "um... that person I want to attack is actually doing something and experienced at that field. I am nothing and nobody gives a damn about me. Uh, so where exactly do I get the permission to attack this person? Why would I want to do that?" Wrong: the No See Um jumps right over this bridge of rationality and is fueled largely by a sense of righteous indignance, of sheer arrogance.
They quickly seize upon a moral gray cloud, something they think cannot be disproven easily by their lust object, the feet of clay as it were, and loudly start announcing to everyone in their circle of contacts that MY LUST OBJECT HAS FEET OF CLAY... FEET OF CLAY... LOOK, LOOKIE LOOKIE HE LIED, HE LIED, SHE'S A LIAR, SHE'S A LIAR, SHE DID THIS, HE DID THAT: IT'S AN OUTRAGE, IT'S AN OUTRAGE; WE SHOULD ALL BE OUTRAGED ---

Bill Clinton's most vocal No See Ums, you will learn quickly by visiting any message board on AOL, are invisible, insignificant people not involved in politics or law, who are RIGHTEOUSLY INDIGNANT AND OUTRAGED by the fact that Slick Willy - gasp - sin of all sins - poked a cute chubby girl in the Oval Office and then lied about it under oath. "That's perjury!" The No See Um shrills.

Nevermind JFK also used the Oval Office to poke a cute chubby girl, and that happened to have been Marilyn Monroe (among others). Of little importance is that like JFK, Clinton was a superb president and statesman, and that romping with starlets seems to come as an accessory piece to such men.

Of even less importance is the obvious question you want to ask the No See Um, such as, "So you're this upset about the perjury because you're an attorney, right? And you're upholding the spirit of the law?" No, the No See Um is neither a politician or a lawyer, doesn't particularly give a damn about the law, and usually can't even spell perjury -- and to the No See Um, such logic falls on deaf ears.

If we were obligated to believe the No See Um, if he or she were truly worthy of our consideration, if he or she were telling the real truth about why he or she is that obsessed with that person, we'd see some previous consistency: Clinton's Antimatter Fans would have all started legal ethics organizations either before or after his perjury; Audra McHugh would be an animation producer herself right now instead of the author of ONE piece of public art in six years, an amateur Toulouse-Lautrec homage, which you can see right now at; Hillary Clinton's accusers would have rallied hard against the National Organization of Women in the Seventies or written salient articles decrying feminism in general and female attorneys in particular. In short, they would have a track record of previous achievement in the very field their lust object has supposedly dragged its clay feet upon.

But no.

Here are the facts: perjury ("He lied! He lied!") is not really the reason the No See Um wants to smear President Bill Clinton. Nor is feminism the real reason the No See Um hates Hillary. Audra McHugh would never have been able to prove in a court of law, or even on Dateline NBC, that Karen McCoy was not a television producer, because if you are producing a television show, you are a television producer. There is ample evidence McCoy was in preproduction. Ain't It Cool News confirmed it. That wasn't the reason. "The reason" is never the reason.

The reason is always that the No See Um is sexually stimulated and energetically charged like an overloaded battery by the very thought of the person they end up smearing. That person's charisma, frankly, just turns the No See Um on. The No See Um responds to that person the way Jennifer Lopez's fans react to her body. Brain shuts off, chakras switch on. It's as though every office light at 30 Rock Plaza gets switched on and the building is Christmas blazing. The power this person has over the No See Um at this highly-charged moment frightens the No See Um. "I want that person," says the No See Um to him or herself. "S/he's energetic. S/he's different. S/he is exciting." That really is the first thought that occurs.

Then a different mechanism, a protective mechanism, switches on. "I am disturbed that I want that person. I am disturbed that I find them energetic. I am disturbed that I find them different. I am disturbed that I find them exciting." The No See Um, or sick fan, asks him or herself, "Why am I feeling this way about somebody I don't even know?"


But the smallness, the inadequacy, the misery this realization engenders in the No See Um is too much to bear. To admit it would be to admit that another person is energetic enough, talented enough, sexy enough in their intense charisma, to have affected the No See Um personally. It implies the Other Person has something the No See Um must not. This creates a homicidal level of resent and envy in the No See Um. The obsession and smearing begin.

Envy is the number two motivator behind No See Ums, those disturbed nobodies who spend each day Googling up nonsense about stars they will never know, calling Sean Hannity to preach about superstars who may have slept with giggly interns but have enough bodyguards to hurt the No See Um very, very badly, telephoning ascending superstars at the studios where they work and harassing them about "lying about being a producer", hacking down or threatening free speech websites, and writing cryptic, threatening emails to me, as TSI's Phil Ingram did on October 23, 2003, because I decided to give him a taste of his own medicine: public exposure he cannot control.

Motivator number one, as I wrote above, is an intense amount of admiration with faintly sexual overtones, which embarrasses and frightens the No See Um, is first switched internally as a coping device into envy, and is then switched externally into the more convenient and socially-acceptable story that the No See Um is outraged by the lust object, and BY GOSH, YOU SHOULD BE, TOO.

No See Ums are fans who stalk peculiar choices of celebrity. You will notice No See Ums don't get upset and rage about Arnold Schwarzenegger's mass groping of innocent females. There are few No See Um camps decimating Madonna online for attempting to abort Britney Spears's career with a single, calculated Sapphic kiss. No See Ums don't call in to Neal Boortz about something untrue George Bush just said.

You see, Schwarzenegger, Madonna and Dubya are acceptable celebrities to obsess over. The No See Um wouldn't be embarrassed by admitting in public he is obsessed with them. Millions already are. They're safe. What scares the No See Um is that he is obsessed with a person others would consider him strange for being preoccupied with.

The popular kids would laugh at a strange kid who thought Bill Clinton was sexy. The cheerleaders would snicker in the hall past the weird kid who found Hillary enticing. Star Trek fans already privately think Doctor Who fans are a bunch of dorks for liking a backwards Seventies British TV show with incomprehensible stories and abominable special effects. What would they think of a wacko who got wet thinking about a black female animation producer they never met who lived 1,500 miles away and was doing a cartoon based on wacko's favorite TV show? Oh no. Insanity like that isn't safe to explain. It would attract the kind of ridicule No See Ums like to dish out -- not receive.

But, the feelings just won't go away. "I just get so obsessed" Like any fan, the No See Um wants to express those wild feelings that just surge and surge and rise in his chest like crazy. What to do? The energy's got to go somewhere

Fans blow off steam by designing websites about their favorite lust object, sending emails to other fans about what the star just did, collecting pictures of them, tabulating -- and in the unbelievable arrogance of the internet these days, critiquing -- their earlier work, and talking about them incessantly... and eventually, in extreme cases, breaking past security, lying their way past the star's assistants, agents and publicists, and suddenly appearing in their favorite star's actual life as a stalker.

Now witness this:

McHugh designed websites about Karen McCoy decrying her as a liar, accused her of lying about being a producer, researched McCoy's earlier work online and by telephone, sent emails about her to hundreds of friends day after day, telephoned the place where McCoy worked, lied to the receptionist and to McCoy's boss saying she was a journalist, and then contacted McCoy herself - to accuse her personally.

If it looks identical by now, it is supposed to.

My point is, Antimatter Celebrity is getting out of hand because the careers and reputations of ordinary people are being destroyed by persons unqualified to do so. In an internet age, everyone is a celebrity and every state and its privacy and libel laws should be Californian. If you are out there getting your job done, and you attract an Antimatter Fan, attorneys and authorities need to start treating your case as they would a celebrity stalking case, because if you have fans, you are a celebrity, whether your face has been in Vogue magazine or not. It is time to redefine celebrity, stalking and fandom for the internet age. We can all become celebrities overnight. It takes one thing to do it. If you have one public fan, you're a celebrity.

We who attract the Antimatter Fan accidentally attract an invisible, envious assailant who behaves like a fan but does not want to publicly admit that he is a fan. Crucial to this disturbed individual's fragile, self-deluded world, where he is simply protecting the universe from your celebrity and its unworthiness (although he conferred it upon you, without your knowledge or permission), and where nobody calls him on the fact that he is clearly obsessed with you, is his remaining invisible where you and your lawyers cannot pinpoint, isolate, reach, and destroy him. He starts small and must remain small. That way when your attorneys start demanding he leave you alone, he can pull a switch and accuse you of harassing him (which happened to McCoy) and generate further sympathy to his cause. Like the microbe insect with the big jaws whose sudden bite burns like fire when you're out in the yard working, your Antimatter Fan must remain invisible in order to continue hurting. Because he likes to remain tiny and unseen, I call him a No See Um.

Which brings us to what these insects do.


Every fan's dream is to penetrate his or her love object's private world and become closely, personally, intimately known to them. Antimatter Fans are no different. The Antimatter Fan hates you because he loves you and loves you because he wishes he could be you because you excite him at the deepest levels and he just can't stand that. He would rather that he excited himself the way you excite him. Blame it on your being so charming and beautiful, and read on.

The Antimatter Fan almost never knows his love object previously or personally. He may have worked with you. In the case of TSI, you may have even worked for them! But somehow, usually through your achievements and resultant renown, you come to your Antimatter Fan's attention. He begins to dwell on your charisma and popularity. He obsesses on your expertise, your looks, your voice, your talent, your hair. He wants to be you, to get inside you, to become you. Most of all, he wants to be known by you. He knows he will never do it by being who and what he is. He festers quietly, brooding over the lack of talent he knows he shows. He will never be a part of your world and he is acutely aware of it. But as a fan, that's the one thing he won't give up on. YOU WILL know his name.

How does he ensure this? By biting you hard -- repeatedly -- so you will never escape or stop thinking about him.

The Republican Party, which really could be called the William Jefferson Clinton Testosterone Brigade, wants to make sure President Clinton will never stop thinking about its members. (Probably literally.) Day in, day out, Bill Clinton's Antimatter Fans and No See Ums light their icon candles, burn their incense sticks and kneel before their psychological framed photo of The Man They Hate Most... and obsess over where his penis went, how, and when. To the infinite amusement of thinking people everywhere, this enormous fan club does exactly what fans do: obsess over their love object's sexual exploits -- without, to borrow from Bob Dylan, "any attempts to shovel a glimpse into the ditch" of what this kind of obsession means.
It means they idolize Bill Clinton the way Brad Pitt's fans idolize Brad Pitt.

Notice how they hate Hillary.

Of course they do! Hillary has HIM! She's the kind of "lucky wife" referred to so chillingly on the Estrogen Brigade websites devoted to lusted-after male stars around the world who happen to also be married. She's the hated Deborah of Hugh Jackman, the mutually despised Jennifers of Brad Pitt and Ben Affleck, the scorned Britney of Justin Timberlake and the loathed Francesca of Ralph Fiennes.

I am almost convinced now that more than half the NeoConservative Republican Party are supposedly "straight" men who actually nurture a mutual, Skull-and-Bones-level-secretive closet gay fascination with Clinton. The dynamics are exactly the same as a spiteful female salsa club bonded by mutual lust for Ricky Martin. They're preoccupied with Clinton's sexual behaviors to the point where it has become pathologically overt, they want to call the sole shots on where his penis goes, and they absolutely despise the person his penis visits the most -- that would be arguably, still, Hillary Rodham Clinton. They despise her with the venomous specificity of a million frustrated would-be "other women" eyeing a star's lucky wife. It is amazing to me how calmly William and Hillary deal with this Boschian reality.

Listening to any right-wing radio talk show is in fact like visiting a Bill Clinton Estrogen Brigade website and clicking on its "I Hate Hillary" page. Bill's Antimatter Fans criticize The Lucky Bitch with nebulous charges she will never be able to completely disprove -- and that's the whole idea.

"Hillary is a lesbian."
"Hillary is ugly."
"Hillary wants to be a man and have a man's power."

Blah, blah, blah. It's all fan drivel, envious mudslinging, and it passes for talk radio and internet website content in 2003. No one can adequately prove his own sexual orientation to those who refuse to believe it; No See Ums know that; no person can fully define whether he is attractive or unattractive, because that's completely subjective; No See Ums are aware of that; and an opinion such as "she's a liar", "she doesn't have the right to do Doctor Who", and "she wants to be a man and have a man's power" cannot be disproven, because they are nothing more than one person's opinion; all of it intentional -- and the unwitting target is placed in a double bind by the No See Um, because if you attempt to fight back, you give your fan the legitimacy and personal contact he craves, but if you say nothing in your defense, other No See Ums conclude that their hero's opinion must be fact. This is the widespread mental pathology of our times.

To get into Bill Clinton's consciousness, and (they hope) be on his mind as much as he is on theirs, No See Ums bite him again and again with an accusation particularly abhorrent to a socially-conscious lawyer: "he lied under oath."

To get into Hillary Clinton's consciousness, and be on her mind as much as she is on theirs, the No See Ums bite her again and again with the accusation most hurtful to heterosexual career women: "she's a dyke."

To get into Karen McCoy's consciousness, and be on her mind as much as McCoy was on her own, Audra McHugh bit her again and again with the accusation most calculated to anger a working producer more than any other: "she's not a real producer and is lying about her experience and expertise."

No See Ums are tiny but their bite gets your attention. How can it be that something so small can bite that hard? Most people bitten by a No See Um on a summer day recall later that it burned worse than being stung by a yellowjacket. This, from something so minute it cannot be seen by the naked eye! The fact that you can't see and smack it only makes your anger smolder to more lethal levels. But don't waste your energy. Save it. Stoke it. Use libel laws to isolate and locate the nuisance and then expend your anger in a single exhaled defamation lawsuit, using collected printouts of the No See Ums' written bites. When you collect your Antimatter Fan's wages and house, you will smile remembering what you read here and how it calmed you down enough to take action.

The No See Um bites you as hard as it can to burn itself into your mind and provoke you into making personal and intimate contact with it. Recognize that intimate contact is what it wants. It wants others to think of it whenever they think of you. Deny them that privilege. They haven't earned it. Ignore the bites, collect as much evidence of the wounds as you can, then simply sue the bastard.


The final weapon in the No See Um's arsenal is his trusty community of fellow stinging insects.
No Antimatter Fan will dare be seen without his all-important community. Next to searching out and destroying envied lust objects, collecting more fellow insects to enlarge his community is what the Antimatter Fan spends the most time on. He values being part of a specific group, a tribe. This tribe is the most important thing he has. He pays all the club dues ahead of time, he bends over backwards flattering fellow community members to gain favor, and he exhausts himself by answering fellow insects' emails and phone calls quickly -- lest his insects, he is certain, turn on him and leave him open to outside attack.

I call Antimatter Fans "No See Ums" because they act like insects. Insects are social creatures who value their role and membership in a hive community. Democrats have often recently marveled at the amazing ability of Republicans, especially the more fascist and NeoConservative of them, to close ranks swiftly in the presence of enemies and toss individuality over a cliff to achieve the goal of the tribe. Dems would be in fact wise to emulate this behavior, because it is the only way to take back Washington. Greens, for instance, refuse to surrender individuality for anyone and they are enemies who hand the White House to Republicans again and again, because unlike insects, they will battle other Liberals over petty disputes instead of tightly closing ranks and deferring debate until the after goal is achieved. In short they don't play fair and are undermining the Non-Republican cause.

Not all No See Ums are NeoConservatives, but all NeoConservatives are No See Ums. Insect Thinking has won the White House. In about a decade, America will resemble a hive as testimony to their lowest-common-denominator, man-as-insect, Darwinian strategy. Ever look at a bee colony? Hives are fascist.

The No See Um's ace of spades is reliance on the insect community he serves. It is his nuclear deterrance. He knows he will win against his love object every time, as long as he has a bank of other hivelings he can call upon to join him in slander, and motivate them into hating/lusting for his target too. The troubling factor is that No See Ums do think alike, and engage in insect think; so rational arguments mean nothing to them. Debating or disproving the smear does no good. All the No See Um has to do is perform the bee dance that demonstrates he is a member of the hive, then say, "I hate the target because he ________." Immediately all the other bees will snap in line and chorus, "We hate the target because he is ________." And the real smear begins. The hapless Antimatter Celebrity is now swatting and slapping at a swarm of bees instead of just one, because the No See Um can rely on the fealty of a tribe, and that tribe defends him.

Once under attack by a multitude of stinging insects, the target is almost destined to fail. One cannot fight off a bee swarm and steer a ship at the same time. This is why Karen McCoy, under siege by Audra McHugh and her hive of stinging multitudes by early 1998, had to relinquish the Doctor Who animation project and seemingly prove McHugh right after all. Between meetings with attorneys, explaining to them what was going on, and flying back and forth to London, I don't think she could have avoided steering her ship into the rocks at all. That was McHugh's strategy. It is the NeoCon strategy. It works.

Bees succeed because when one bee attacks, he emits a chemical that rallies the other bees to join him and swarm his unfortunate target. Ants succeed because when their hill is invaded, as a multitude they spread all over the invader and lay siege as a legion to bring it to the ground, then devour it. Republicans succeed because when one Republican attacks, other Republicans quickly close ranks and support him, no matter what he says, no matter what he does, no matter what law he breaks or what crime he commits. Antimatter Fans who libel and defame innocent people have also succeeded, using the same social-insect strategy.

Until now.

There is a popular saying: "Naming a thing will give you power over it." It is my stark intention here to name the phenomenon which has terrorized so many in the Nineties and now, and has given fascists in America their temporary power. We must name it, for in naming it, we step from under the black umbrella of its control, stand outside it, and gain ultimate power over it. We must designate a name for this psychological dysfunction that grips America which has been used to defame, smear and cripple the careers and lives of so many. Naming the sickness is the first step. Calling it and defeating it are all that remain.

I hereby define Antimatter Celebrity:

"Antimatter Celebrity is unwanted public attention that confers unsolicited infamy, celebrity, or notoriety upon an individual, interfering with their life, altering their public image and/or reputation, and that frequently appears as the result of one or more individuals targeting and defaming said individual for personal, subjective, and often difficult to qualify, reasons."

I hereby define Antimatter Fan:

"An Antimatter Fan is an individual who evidences obsessive interest in a person unknown or only impersonally known to said individual, who collects and is unusually interested in gathering and spreading libelous, defaming and negative information about that person, who exhibits compulsive fan-to-celebrity behaviors such as unsolicited correspondence (including emails) to and about that person, unsolicited website construction about that person, unsolicited and defaming correspondence, telephone calls and emails to third parties about that person, and who, if not identified and intervened with in time, in extreme cases, escalates his activities to attempts to personally visit, contact or become intimately known to that person, often in activities that borderline legal definitions of harassment and stalking. The Antimatter Fan categorically and with great vehemence denies that he or she is a fan of the targeted person, but the obsession he or she exhibits, and the quasisexual intensity of said obsession, makes his or her role as an unwanted fan evident and clear. The target does not have to have appeared in popular magazines or in motion pictures or television to be considered a celebrity. The fact that he or she has apparent fans engaging in fan behavior such as outlined above constitutes an extant celebrity."

No See Um is my slang term for an Antimatter Fan. What's yours?


Finally, I would like to state from experience that it is fairly easy to defuse and destroy the Antimatter Fan and the negative celebrity his obsession with you has bequeathed upon you without your solicitation. It takes three steps.

1. Remain Impersonal and Do Not Indulge Contact.

Do not award your Antimatter Fan any personal contact with you. He will provoke you by saying the most outrageous and insulting things about you he can absolutely imagine. You will want to fight back and do it personally. Resist this urge. It is smart to bear in mind that he has spent a lot of time thinking about you and figuring out what he can say or print that will hurt you the most. That, he believes, you bring you out swinging and put you in his face where he can enjoy deep, personal and intimate contact with his favorite celebrity. Deny the bastard the privilege. Ignore, print, and keep all his statements and continue with your life. Do not answer his allegations. If you must, simply release a statement. In that statement, restrict your comments to the short paragraph impersonal form favored by Hollywood public relations firms, and keep it plural first person: "We are saddened that certain individuals feel it necessary to cause nuisance for innocent firms (persons, individuals). While consulting our legal counsel, we wish (Antimatter Fan) the best and thank our fans and supporters for continuing to wish us well. Thank you." Repeat this statement and don't elaborate from it. Say nothing further. Allow your attorneys to do the talking from then on. In court when you are awarded your Antimatter Fan's house and property, you will be thankful you did so.

2. Start Collecting Some Ammo of Your Own

I guarantee you will want to delete the emails your Antimatter Fan has written to and about you. You'll want to erase his messages to you on your answering machine. You will desire to destroy and shred those letters, statements and emails you find between your Antimatter Fan and his hive friends discussing you and sharing lies about you. DON'T DO IT. This material is called Evidence. As soon as it appears on your phone, buy a little phone microphone from Radio Shack for 2 bucks and a small $10 tape recorder. Record the messages on tapes and start indexing and labeling them. Keep the tapes in a safe place, such as a bank deposit box or inside a combination safe. As soon as Antimatter Fan libel appears in your email inbox, skip over delete and instead print out a copy, store it in a folder, and store the email in a digital folder. Label and index it. Keep all records. You will need them in court and your lawyer will thank you. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHRED, DELETE OR DESTROY ANYTHING YOUR ANTIMATTER FAN SAYS OR WRITES ABOUT YOU. BELIEVE ME, HE OR SHE IS PRAYING YOU WILL.

3. Sue, and Then Continue Living Your Successful Life, Doing The Exact Thing Your Fan Envied and Hated About You In The First Place

Nuff said. I believe if enough of us do this enough times, not only will the country change, Antimatter defamation, especially on the internet, will stop.
That sounds pretty close to what I have experienced from Bridges, Weidner and gang. It actually makes me sick to think about somebody is so obsessed with me to the point that he literally doesn't do anything else. Look at this that came from a recent guest on our Podcast:

I received this as a comment on my In Defense of the Innocent Blog:

They obviously heard the podcast and then did a search....


"So your book is going to be published by Red Pill Press.

Did you know that Laura Knight Jadczyk stole $150,000 in a house raffle in 2003 and escaped to

Did you know that her newest book is plagiarized from 2 books written by Weidner and Brdges whom
she has attacked for the last four years before she took their work on Fulcanelli.

Do you know that Ark Jadczyk was funded by George Soros?

You do not want to be asscoated with these people."
This is actually about the 6th or 7th time I have received an email reporting this same message being spammed all over the internet. You have to wonder where they come up with the lies? It's hard to pick a favorite since the George Soros and "plagiarizing" the Bridges/Weidner book run pretty much neck and neck. I wonder how I plagiarized their book since most of Secret History is derived from articles published on our website at the time of writing them and there is a long and continuous record of same. Other parts are documented in the archives of the Quantum Future Group cass discussion. So certainly, everything that is included in the book is documented by date.

As for the Soros thing... it's kind of a contradiction, isn't it? To steal 150 K AND be funded by George Soros.

Actually, I think I know where they came up with the George Soros thing. Ark once attended a conference at a University in Hungary that had received a Soros gift.

In any event, just more evidence of the obsession of Bridges.


A Disturbance in the Force
Colleen Johnston and Vincent Bridges Trash Laura and cassiopaea

It seems to me that in the interest of education for those visiting this relatively new forum, we have all examined, in nauseating detail, the 'trashing phenomenon'. We've done this, basically, as a service to those among us who are not so well aquainted with Laura's, and the team's, work.

This thread stands as a service to those readers who haven't had the 'oh so lovely experience' of watching these multiple attacks develop and fade away over time.

At this point, and this is just my opinion, I believe that we've wasted enough energy on this tripe. Quite frankly, these attackers could do no greater service to establishing the veracity of this work than spending the time, energy and financial resources that they spend on trying 'oh so hard' to convince people that all things found within these pages should be at best ignored, and at worst, ridiculed.

We get it, okay?

We 'get' the fact that the open and unbiased dissemination of truthful information regarding our shared reality just really gets your goat.

We 'get' the fact that you find yourself in this world alone, afraid and ready to tear down anyone who seems to be figuring it out.

We 'get' the fact that there are those among you who's identity and primary purpose in life is to keep the status quo feeding system exactly as it is, and we get that anything that threatens this primary purpose not only causes shivers of fear in your private dark places, where no one else can see, but also causes an anger that very quickly defines you.

We get it.

In fact, we 'got it' a long time ago, and even when we first encountered your techniques, propoganda and mechanics we were not impressed. At this point, after all these years, we're not only not impressed, but we just might be feeling something akin to pity for your impoverished mental capacity.

However, since pity is not really our 'thing', it's probably best at this point to just say, 'we get it' - and 'it really doesn't matter how many lies you tell and how much time and money you spend trying to convince those who are just now trying to open their clouded eyes that this is not the place to look'. Ultimately, those with eyes will see, and we will do what we do.

Isn't that the most frustrating thing you've ever heard - that pesky fact that the truth needs no one and no thing to defend it; that pesky fact that those who can see will See?

I have to admit, at this point in time, that I'm very relieved to not be you, because, quite frankly, it's hell to fight something that can't be affected by your blows.
Top Bottom