December 2, 2007

The True Tale of the Mad Hatter

The True Tale of the Mad Hatter

By Arabesque

The dark underside of the 9/11 truth movement consists of a strange supporting cast of eccentrics, dis-informers, trolls, internet personas, general-all-around yahoos, and… who knows? This is a story about a Mad Hatter who sang a song of Death and Vengeance to the hooded and mysterious Arabesque.

The Hatter turned to Madness soon after Webster Tarpley infamously described Cindy Sheehan and others as “lying in appalling fashion” and a “wretched individual” in the Kennebunkport Warning controversy. Arabesque, TruthAction and others were reporting these attacks. While bringing attention to this subject, Arabesque wrote: “I am not advocating a conclusion on this controversy, but I am trying to bring attention to the claims and counterclaims of those involved. I believe the main issue of importance is that non-9/11 truth activists are being unjustly treated by promoters of the warning.” [Photo: Mad Hatter wearing one of his many disguises.]

Seemed reasonable enough, right? Or was it? In the 9/11 truth movement, Orwell is rolling in his grave. Reporting personal attacks are the same as making an attack! Speaking out against divisiveness is divisive! Unity is silence in the face of outrageous disruption! Or so some would have us believe… One such person was… we’ll call him the Mad Hatter. Hatter contributed some good analysis and his work was at least appreciated by a few. He was a long-time member of this group and contributed many insights with the appearance of a normal, every day researcher and activist. But after Arabesque initiated a discussion about the Kennebunkport Warning controversy, Hatter began to act very strangely. Hatter’s first comment sounded perfectly reasonable saying, “Misappropriating someone's signature is a crime. In this case I don't know if the typical punishment for such a crime is commensurate with the seriousness of the alleged misdeed."

“Fair enough”, thought Arabesque. “Nothing wrong here, although it has not been proven who has committed the crime.” One of Hatter’s next comments seemed to apologize for Tarpley’s divisive behaviour saying, “I've criticized Tarpley in the past for his acerbic tone. It's possible that Tarpley is simply an a** at times.” But then suddenly, Mad Hatter began to shift into strange territory: "Quite frankly I don't trust anybody completely, and I have considerable mistrust of most. I'm confident that you realize that by calling attention to this dispute while clearly taking a side, you set yourself up to be the object of suspicion."

Suspicion? What was the basis for this suspicion? To some in the 9/11 truth movement, everyone is a suspect. Arabesque responded decisively and concisely with the clear point of view that, “Yes I am taking sides. I am taking sides against personal attacks.”

But the 'Hooded One' had a feeling about Hatter that would not shake; “What is up with this guy?” Arabesque was about to find out. Hatter began to insist that Arabesque was intentionally trying to discredit Mr. Tarpley, and then Hatter appeared to have lost his objectivity, “It seems to me that discrediting Tarpley might be a top priority for those who want to derail the truth movementYou have yet to suggest any ulterior motive Tarpley might have for his actions.

Motive? Now, Arabesque suspected that the Hatter was up to something. It was not Arabesque’s responsibility to provide a motive for anything—only the facts as they stood. This appeared to be an attempt to derail the conversation and manipulate a response which could not be proven and then be attacked as a straw-man. Arabesque replied clearly and concisely, “I don't have to supply a motive for his actions. His actions speak for themselves.” Something was up. And then it got weirder.

Hatter turned to Madness—he posted images side by side implying that 9/11 activists at were communists. “Communism In America.”

“Well isn’t that pretty weird”, Arabesque thought. “What’s this guy’s problem? Who goes around insinuating that activist groups are communists?” It appeared that the Mad Hatter was trying to manipulate another response. Hatter’s comment seemed more than a little… Mad and not worth answering. At this point, Arabesque figured “he’s just a troll—that ever-so-present entity on 9/11 forums who go around trying to stir things up with nonsensical accusations and diversionary commentary.” But this was completely unexpected since the Hatter appeared to be a normal member of the group, and had never acted this way before! Was there something more to this behavior? Arabesque had a feeling there was.

And then it got weirder and even more transparent. Arabesque ignored the absurd insinuation that were communists and posted another thread about 9/11 activist Michael Wolsey. It became clear Hatter was not only a troll—he was trying to discredit the Kennebunkport Warning investigators with absurd insinuations—blatant and ridiculous disinformation! Mad Hatter asked in this thread if Michael Wolsey had “any relation to James?” James Woosley, no relation to Michael Wolsey (note spelling difference), was a former director of the CIA. The Mad Hatter did not give James' last name because he knew it was spelled differently. The Mad Hatter had dishonest intentions. To Arabesque’s surprise, Hatter was quickly given the boot from the forum by an administrator for these and other comments insinuating holocaust denial—of which, Arabesque was completely unaware about. Hatter had run out of warnings for his silly disruption, but Arabesque was nonetheless surprised that the HatMan was shown the door. Although it appeared to be the demise of the Mad Hatter, it was just the beginning.

The Mad Hatter is a man of many, often fanciful names and sock puppets—but easily identifiable. Often, Hatter attempts to let others know it is indeed the Madman wearing the Hat. Elsewhere, Hatter wrote “I stayed on the fence until someone pushed me off… I have to say, the evidence I have collected thus far tends to support Tarpley… When it comes to and, they appear to be connected by more than common purpose.” What was this common purpose? What was this evidence? Mr. Hatter of course, had none and never gave anyhe merely had insinuations. Statements without support or validation. Disinformation. Again, Hatter frequently made the absurd insinuation that was a communist front group or Communism In America, repeatedly hinting without evidence that it “looks as though Tarpley may be right,” referring to the unsupported accusation that Arabesque and others were disinformation operatives and even “COINTELPRO”. Where was this evidence? Neither Hatter or others have ever provided any. Hatter ironically commented again using innuendo to imply “Strange the focus is on Cindy Sheehan and not Arabesque… I think it's rather clear that you are trying to discredit Tarpley through innuendo and hyperbolæ. Why don't you let Cindy Sheehan speak for herself? As I've already pointed out, you appear to be attempting to discredit Tarpley by any duplicitous means at your disposal. Tarpley names names.” Hatman was exactly describing himself and even Webster Tarpley, not Arabesque! Everywhere, Hatter insinuated, suggested, and hinted without evidence, facts, or proof, “there is an even more insidious form of disruptor. There are several people who are presenting themselves as experts on disinformation, and are, themselves, acting as disinformation operatives. Naming them is tantamount to virtual suicide.” Arabesque responded sarcastically, “probably because I'm really good at debunking nonsensical and absurd… insinuations like this one.” Did Hatter have any proof at all? The Mad Hatter was only a Man of insinuations without facts.

If someone is accused of being related to a CIA director, but no proof is given, this is an accusation without confirmation. It may or may not be true. To the uniformed, accusations can be interpreted differently based on your awareness of the facts to confirm or disprove them:

  • If the necessary information is known to the intended audience, they can make a judgment as to whether the accusation is correct.
  • If the necessary information is not known, the suggested possibility or accusation is enough to create confusion and uncertainty—is this information true? Could it be true? Is it likely to be true?
  • A sceptic treats all information as unconfirmed until it is backed up with credible sources.
  • Those who do not examine information critically are more apt to accept misleading claims without questioning them. For example, the official story of 9/11. This is a psychological trick exploited by many manipulative promoters of disinformation who prey on this human weakness.
  • Disinformation entails the distribution of deliberately misleading information; accusations without confirmed sources or verifiable evidence qualify as such.

The Mad Hatter insinuated everywhere with poorly constructed, transparent, and even silly disinformation; misleading and unsupported insinuations that was a “communist group”, Michael Wolsey was “related to former CIA director James Woolsey”, Arabesque was a “disinformation operative”, and that,,,, and other websites were “owned” by the same people—a psy-op truth movement. Where was the proof? There wasn't any. These were all obviously and clearly absurd insinuations.

Why would Hatter do this? What was the motive? Was there money or financial benefit involved? If so, who did the Mad Hatter work for? Was Hatter just… Mad? He appeared to be only selectively absurd about certain topics, and the Kennebunkport Warning controversy was one of them. Everywhere, the Hatman “defended” Tarpley without relying on facts; instead attacking those who criticized him with baseless insinuations and absurd disinformation! In this regard, he was no different than Webster Tarpley. Hatter’s sudden turn from seemingly normal and rational changed to Mad disruption and relentless insinuation almost instantly. At one time, he was not a MadMan. Why did he go Mad? Turning to Madness is a common trait seen by agent provocateurs who at first pretend to be legitimate members of a group. Could the Mad Hatter be a Hat-wearing agent provocateur? This is someone who works in the interests of another group while provoking debate, spreading disinformation, and causing disruption. The Mad Hatter was doing all three. It was clear that he had relentless and deliberate intent. It was not clear why he was doing it. Only the Hatter himself could “suggest any ulterior motive”. Why are you doing it HatMan?

And this Hatter was anywhere and everywhere with different Hats to his name! MadHat had a dozen Hats—like a private army of Hatters. The Mad Hatting campaign of insinuations without evidence continued anywhere Arabesque and others resided: “I am left to question Michael Wolsey's motive for producing such a lengthy condemnation of Tarpley. Could he be making a mountain out of a molehill for some ulterior motive? Where can I find some example of Wolsey's original 9/11 work so that I can assess the sincerity of his efforts?” He further revealed with blatant insinuation, “I would expect a person determined to infiltrate and endeavor to disrupt or mislead the movement would provide a forum for those people and ideas which are already prominent, or which are inevitably going to become prominent. This latter category can be extremely valuable since it gives the illusion that the infiltrator is at the forefront of the effort, helping to dig up the latest dirt.

As the Mad Hatter should well know, accusations without evidence are worthless. This Mad Hatter had none, and he knows it. I know that he has no evidence, because I know none exists.

For his insistent insinuations without evidence and factually challenged disruption, Hatter was banned in multiple 9/11 forums again and again. But the Hatter kept coming back with different Hats! This Man with a Hat was on a mission of disruption, insinuation, and disinformation. An impartial observer commented that Hatter, “goes to extraordinary lengths in establishing that he is knowledgeable and erudite, which he must be given some of his posts… only to bring out low-grade disinformation (or is that 3rd grade?) like, ‘a lot of these sites register by a proxy service’ (a well-known one used by millions of sites - maybe because they don't want their address available for harassment?) and ‘ is communist’ because it uses the raised-fist symbol and (gasp) red letters. His apparent native intelligence is not an excuse; it only makes him look even worse for putting out such obvious junk attacks.” This correctly summed up the Matter—the Mad Hatter was both intelligent and absurd; his unfounded claims were only prolific insinuations.

This Hatter was clearly Mad in more than one sense. He issued a death threat disguised in the form of a song to Arabesque—one of his calling cards:

To Whom it May Concern

I will find you/ 'cause I will hunt you down / I will walk behind you/ Without a sound/ And I will strike/ When the time is right/ I will bring you down/ Oh, to the ground/ And I will make you bleed / Like you did me/ Oh once before/ And of this/ You can be sure/ I will hear you cry/ For mercy's hand/ But that will be/ At my command/ For you can't do/ What you have done/ And expect/ To stand, not run/ I spoke the truth/ And you spoke lies/ And for this/ You will die/ To taste your blood/ Is oh so fine/ And vengeance sweet/ She shall be mine/

This Death Threat was obviously directed at Arabesque for reasons that are not obvious, although the Mad Hatter disingenuously implies otherwise. The Mad Hatter WAS "walking behind" Arabesque and following him to every forum he posted in as implied in this song, so this was clearly evidence which could be interpreted as a Death Threat to Arabesque. Arabesque had nothing to do with The Man with The Hat and his initial banning—the HatMan was warned multiple times by an administrator. Arabesque had no control over Mad Hatter’s fate. Arabesque was not a moderator. Arabesque does not control who decides to ban the Mad Hatter, and the Hatman is simply mistaken, paranoid, or disingenuous for claiming otherwise. Nor did Arabesque accuse the Hatter of anything or even seriously engage him in discussion since much of what the Hatter said was… well—Mad. Arabesque largely ignored the Mad Hatter and his transparently passive-aggressive attempts at disruption and derailment. But clearly, Hatter wanted to know who Arabesque was. Hatter was Mad—asking for Arabesque’s name in emails to a prominent activist in the 9/11 truth movement. Hatter wanted the names of the Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice Steering Committee. The Hatter stalked Arabesque anywhere and everywhere for three months. The Mad Hatter gave Arabesque a Death Threat in the form of a song. The HatMan would not go away. He was either paid to do what he was doing, or he was a creepy Madman with an army of Hats in disguise.

The full story has not been revealed. The Identity of the Man under the Hat is known. The Rabbit Hole is gapingly open—how far it go? A scary place indeed. All has yet to be disclosed about this Man under a Hat.