For those of you actually following the stories I’ve been posting concerning TBRNews.org, I have recieved further information on the real identity of Brian Harring (the so-called author of the de-bunked 9000 dead servicemen story). I have been in e-mail communication with him and he has authorized me to post this diary in the hopes that he can somehow clear his name.
Assuming everything he has told me is true and he isn’t part of this whole scam, then this gentlemen needs some help, if only to get the truth out there.
I’ll try to sum it all up below the fold (apologies if it gets too long!)
First, the background for those of you not familiar with this. I strongly suggest reading my first two diaries to get a real appreciation of what’s going on.
The first diary is called WARNING: Beware the “Voice from the White House”.
The second diary is called Follow up: TBRNews and Brian Harring.
So, to sum up to this point. TBRNews.org is a scam website. It promotes conspiracy theories and made-up stories as truth. Why? Well, I have my own theories on this. The theory I like best is a comment posted to this story from 2002 and can be found here:
by Fight the Right Tuesday December 10, 2002 at 01:05 PM
Rivero, What Really Happened, Go off, Dandelion, Gordon Thomas are essentially all part of an inbred and incestuous network of Right Wing propagandists and disinformation artists.
They included not only the standard Hard Right outlets like Newsmax but also Christian Fascist moupieces like Dandelion.
Their political function and agenda in general is to act as a phony opposition or Trojan Horse media specifically targetted towards those people who question the official story. If you study the disinformation put out by these propagandists, you will see a similar pattern in that they question the official story or version of events–only to carefully spin the issue in a way which just so happens to reinforce their own Right Wing agendas and political campaigns.
In particular with respect to 9-11, most of the sites have tried to seize upon obvious holes and lies in the official story about 9-11 in order to direct and deflect blame AWAY from the Bush Regime and American State in general towards some foreign bogeyman or patsy.
The bottom line is that these pseudo-alternative media outlets set up by the Right Wing have the effect of being classic CIA style psyops operations. They question the official story, only to steer and focus attention away from the more fascistic political factions which support the American military-corporate complex onto a suitable “enemy” foreign or domestic.
I have spent countless hours researching this aspect of the story and found a disturbing link between my research on TBRNews (specifically how it relates to Harring’s current threats) and the story referenced above. Also, the person who wrote the story above calls himself S. Boyle and I can find nothing from him past April of 2003 when he stopped writing on his blog. If you care to read a further entry of S. Boyle on the harassment he got in early 2003 concerning his research, you can see that here.
Anyway, on to Brian Harring. Brian is a computer geek who works on Linux stuff (I won’t even begin to describe it, I’m not that computer literate!). Brian knew Peter Stahl (one of the many pseudonyms used by Walter Storch, editor of TBRNews) a few years ago and lost touch. He became aware that his name was being used on the military deaths story because he began getting e-mails from readers who googled his name trying to track him down. He then googled TBRNews and Walter Storch and came across my original diary where he recognized the name Peter Stahl as someone he once knew. He then e-mailed me wanting to know if I knew how to contact Mr. Stahl. This was when I wrote the second diary on the subject. I did some independent checking, made a few calls and have determined that the computer-geek Brian Harring is who he says he is. And he is NOT the one who wrote the TBRNews story.
Brian then contacted (via e-mail) Peter Stahl to get him to cease and desist using his name on the story. What ensued was a series of e-mails back and forth between the two. Brian then catalogued the whole story on his blog, complete with copies of all the e-mails and background on his past relationship with Pete Stahl.
His latest entry along with another e-mail to me today details the fact that he is now being threatened by Mr. Stahl and the “publisher” who is supposedly going to write a book based on “Brian Harring’s” DOD findings.
Now, the tie-in to the story from 2002 that I reference above is important to why the theory quoted above makes some sense. The so-called publisher for this current book is a woman named Carol Adler from Dandelion Books. It’s clear when you google her or Dandelion that this is a sham on-line publishing operation, as evidenced here. This is also the organization tied to S. Boyle’s story from 2002 where he found evidence of umbrella ownership with a number of these conspiracy-pushing websites. I think TBRNews is also one of these websites and part of this umbrella organization which S. Boyle identifies as Great Dominion. What I don’t know is who is behind it all. Or is it simply coincidence that Stahl is trying to get this fake book published by Dandelion Books?
Perhaps this is something e-Pluribus Media would like to dig into. I think there is a story here, but I have limited resources, any help would be appreciated.
Thanks!
I was listening to “World Focus” with Blase Bonpane last Sunday morning (KPFK-Los Angeles 90.7FM) and he interviewed Tim Goodrich, one of the founders of Iraqi Veterans Against the War. Blase asked him about the U.S. casualty figure really being 9,000. Goodrich enthusiastically endorsed that figure, while Blase was more circumspect, saying he would like to see the number verified by another source. After learning about TBR news on the internet, I was upset hearing their figure being taken at face value.
Profile on Time Goodrich: http://www.notinourname.net/troops/goodrich-4mar05.htm
Iraq Veterans Against the War: http://www.ivaw.net/
Blase Bonpane and Office of the Americas: http://officeoftheamericas.org/
I have said it before in your other diaries and now I am saying it again, this site is based in england. Second, I don’t get what you are trying to do with this attempting to discredit a site that gives much of the same info we see all over the web and on this and DK as well.
If you don’t trust what the Voice of the White House Says, fine, don’t believe it.
I am suspicious of all the “fuss’ over this site”…TBR news, Truthseekers, frankly, and have been for awhile now..
VOTWH true or not, who is to say, not you or I, so what’s the big deal…at this point we don’t know if anything, anywhere, said by anyone is true.
I think it makes a very interesting read and suggest others check it out.
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/index.asp
I worry when someone says Beware of this site.
To me there is always a ‘what if’ factor, so why would I or anyone deny themselves that possibility of knowing. All in all it is just another bit of info that may or may not be true.
Please go to the truthseeker website you mention and click on the Voice from the White House piece down the page a bit. When the article comes up, right under the title, it says TBRNews as the source. When I did my original story, I thought it came from truthseeker as well, but a small amount of digging leads to TBRNews as the source.
So, unfortunately, you are wrong.
And by the way, did you actually READ this diary or the previous two? I mean really read them? Because it sounds like you’ve skimmed them and just decided I’m attacking TBRNews for fun or something. I have done a significant amount of research on these diaries and I’m not just blowing smoke!
I don’t mean to be rude here, but your comment struck a chord, especially given the amount of time and effort I’ve put into this.
Yes I did read them and I read nearly all of this one but it get so intricate, it is hard to follow, I did read the whole thing that this fellow put in your last diary which caused you to write this one.
I was following the site (Trusthseeker and TBR)long before you wrote your diaries and I referenced the site in a comment at DK, months ago, and because of that I was linked across the internet, right back to my blog and called a possible ‘troll’ if not a real one for even referencing the site.
I read your diaries more than once to try to get just where you were coming from and it is not easy.
I know that TBR is referenced as the source, but by extension so is Truthseeker to your readers.
Downthread from this another poster says he will not look at the site anymore after reading your diary.
So your diary does have an effect on people, that I think is unfortunate. He says writing style changes, or he uses kids and children interchangibly, well that is really suspicious! My writing style changes with my mood or the days, and the usuage of words changes as well.
Again my point is why stamp beware onto this (tbr. news. site or any site. It is rather like don’t read this book, or don’t read this newpaper because you are suspicious of the owner of the business, etc.
Now if I or anyone references this site, for any reason, the seed has been planted that this site/source is suspicious.
Its like telling us not to read a book because the source of the book or the publisher of a book is not to your liking or you have found connections from this person to that person, to that organization, etc.
Could you explain why you did this research on TVOTWH and TBR news in the first place and what was your purpose.
TVOTWH is no more or no less than other article or entry on the internet, it is up to the reader to determine if they lend any credence to any information found in any place on the internet or elsewhere, just as its up to the reader on this site to determine whether to accept anything that is written.
Perhaps you could tell me what nefarious purposes this TBR news has, what would be their purpose is putting on something that they made up,. to unseat the president, to unseat the administration. What are we trying to do here on this site, we want the President to be impeached. Only time till tell the validity of TVOTWH and why dismiss it.
Well let us determine if we give credence or not to this Voice or any other.
If you were sitting in the white house, anywhere in that house and you had info that you wanted to get out to the public, where would you put that info, what site would you put it on.
This whole thing is a little like book burning,or black listing, don’t read this book, you must never see/read this book, etc.
I get your point in your other diaries that you are warning others not to reference the VOTWH in any work, or you will not be taken seriously or held in suspicion if you do. But still I do not get it..
Finally TVOTWH is just one view of a whole bunch of other views on the internet, and should be taken that way, with the proverbial grain of salt. It would be a little like me saying beware of this diary of yours, there is info there I am suspicious of so stay away from it and do not reference it in anything.
I do also know that this current diary more specifically deals with the issue of one man’s name usage and I am not disputing that, I am disagreeing with your premise in the series and I feel it is important to state my view of it.
You know it is not easy for me to say these words here, to challenge the words you have written on the subject, but I feel someone must speak up in cases like this and not just merely accept what you have written.
This is not about you personally, this is about the subject you have raised. I am sure you did the research with the best of intentions and you did a lot of hard work, I simply disagree with your findings as relates to TVOTWH.
I’m all for people reading the Voice From the White House, as long as they recognize it for what it is = fiction. Entertaining fiction even. But when people start citing it as fact, they aren’t doing themselves or any of their readers any favours.
If you happen to enjoy reading it for the express purpose of entertainment, go for it! I even read it every now and then for a laugh. But if you think there is some grain of truth to it, then I suspect you also are the type to argue that the WWE is a real sport. And they changed the name from WWF because it isn’t a sport, it’s entertainment….
your comment above:
“But if you think there is some grain of truth to it, then I suspect you also are the type to argue that the WWE is a real sport. And they changed the name from WWF because it isn’t a sport, it’s entertainment….””
See this is what I object to,,,,you telling me there is ‘no grain of truth’ and if I should think there is then I am in fantasy land. You are deciding the grain of truth, based on your research of the site ownership and a long tangled list of connections and twists…
I will decide if I think there is a grain of truth in it or not, thank you very much, and do not like you directing ridicule at me if I should possibly not view it as entertainment.
You can present your case, and that’s fine, but allow me and others to draw our own conclusions as to the validity. I do not think you made any sort of closed case at all to dispute or confirm the source of the Voice.
I neither view TVOTWH as the ‘truth’ or as ‘entertainment’, I view it as another piece of info, just like thousands of others I see every day, which may or may not have truth or validity, but I will digest and discern that myself.
You know that we could very well label this (Booman)site a source of entertainment, does that preclude a grain of truth from coming out of it.
Next I guess we should talk about what is ‘Truth’, there are many levels of truth, there is your truth, my truth, Rove’s truth, Bush’s truth…all the members of this site have their truth and courts of law were established to find the consensus truth.
So I do not think you or anyone can be taken as the arbiter of truth in general, just your own personal truth.
In any case, I do not see how referencing any comment, diary, or article can be construed as citing it as fact. I cannot even cite this article or any other diary and call it ‘fact’.
I just can’t write any more right now, or I would get into what is a “fact” a whole other subject….
Thank you for your comments. Here’s a 4 for perseverance! But you should BEWARE of my future diaries! 🙂
I read the other diaries, and appreciate the research on the TBRNews web site. I have been reading the Voice of the White House for several months. Although I originally found it interesting, I had come to realize it was probably just stuff gleaned from other sources on the web, with some made up stuff in between. I knew it was BS when the author took credit for breaking the Gannon/Guckert story. Also, if you look, the writing style varies drastically from week to week. Some weeks, there are one sentence paragraphs with lots of space in between. Other weeks, there’s no white space at all. Sometimes, he calls readers “kids”, other times, it’s “children”. Also, the basic facts about the person haven’t remained consistent over time, and the writing style itself can vary significantly from week to week.
I just deleted TBRNews from my favorites listing and won’t be visiting there anymore. The info you provided about Peter Stahl/Walter Storch being a nazi revisionist pushed it over the edge for me.
I really do appreciate your research.
Thank you!
It seems to me that you have done the research that convices you of your conclusions. It seems to me also, that others disagree with your overall premise that since you find no truth or fact in it, others should come to the same conclusions. You will no doubt find some who do agree with you.
I think the point diane was attempting to make is that each person needs to and should come to their own conclusion about the usefulness or veracity of the site in question (or any site or topic in question).
Some of us (like me, for instance) are so by gosh stubborn that if someone tells me not to do something or not to read something I just sort of have to in order to see what conclusions or understandings I come to on my own.
So the two of you may choose to disagree with what you think of this site and its value, if any, but maybe you both might just agree to disagree.
Now I have to go and read this dang thing for myself. . .and I really don’t have the time I want to spend on it, but there you go.
Well put. I just want to clarify that I never said not to read it. I simply was pointing out that it’s healthy to be skeptical if you DO choose to read it…
It seems to boil down to the definition of the term “beware”. Some see it as me saying, “Don’t ever go there!”. I meant it as, “If you go there, be sure you understand what may be going on…”
I have resigned myself to the “agree to disagree” position with Dianne…
What I hoped for was a thoughtful discussion of the details of research I’ve done. Obviously, that didn’t happen! Oh well…