Or w2qrx. I can never get the "q" and "2" placement straight. Which is a sad look out for me considering I'm supposed to be part of this "organization".
I apologize in advance for the excessive use of "" you are about to encounter. As Nicolas at Truthmove has pointed out, almost every term these people use should be in quotes as they are either misapplied, inaccurate, or, especially in the case of "WQ2RX" made up whole cloth.
You may remember "WQ2RX" being bandied about in the aftermath of the Kennebunkport fiasco where Webster Tarpley accused Cindy Sheehan, Dalia Wasfi, Ann Wright and Jamillia El Sharif of being "appalling liars" and "wretched individuals" . If you've blissfully forgotten, here's a reminder like:
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/2007/09/how-we-...
Soon after it was clear that any attempts to drive a wedge between these women and 911truth wasn't going to work, the target of the attacks switched from "Daliar4" to those of us who defended "Daliar4". Mr. Tarpley went so far as to go on stage during the 911 anniversary and publicly suggest me, Cosmos, Arabesque and Micheal Wolsey were the new face of Co-intelpro.
The problem with that is it is well known that the first people to make open accusations of "being agents" are almost always agents themselves, trying to beat the real activists to the punch. But as horrible as that was, it was to pale against the new waves of attacks, calls to hunt people down and death threats that would happen under the excuse of hunting down the terrorist "Al Qaida organization", "WQ2RX".
Which I'm supposed to be part of. Much like Tarpley's assertions re: The Ford Foundation, who I'm also supposed to be working for. I'm tempted to make my usual sarcastic comments about sending away for my back pay. However, there would be one tiny snag: unlike The Ford Foundation,"WQ2RX" does not exist.
"WQ2RX" is a fabrication created by members of the "no planes" crowd as an excuse to engage in internet harassment, including but not limited to unwanted phone calls, attempts to invade privacy, posting addresses and phone numbers believed to be those of the targets, and calls for further harassment/ death threats, often through the means of bizarre videos posted through many YouTube puppet accounts. The people promoting this rubbish--including Nico Haupt, Webfairy, Killtown and Fred-- claim "WQ2RX" is an Al Qaida terrorist cell, a cell conveniently made up of 911 activists who have been the most effective at limiting disruption efforts in 911 truth activism.
The first major awareness of this coordinated attempt to label 911 activists who challenged Tarpley as "Al Qiada terrorists" was fall of last year, in the aftermath of the Kennebunkport fallout. But by winter, their activity had fallen off, presumably they had noted their efforts to "shut us up" had failed miserably. Other half-hearted attempts were made, including Haupt's Internet show "911stalker TV", hosted on Paula Gloria's YouTube channel "Father down the Rabbit hole", which seemed to consist of Mr. Haupt trying to harass people by phone. This meme seemed to peeter out, as did related "WQ2RX" operations. Until May of this year.
In this charming article, Alex Constantine accuses Truthmove of--you guessed it--being a member of "WQ2RX":
http://aconstantineblacklist.blogspot.com/2008/05/...
Tuesday, May 6, 2008 TruthMove.org's Connection to the WQ2RX MEDIA CENSORSHIP GROUP In the introduction (posted below), we met John Albanese, a close associate of TruthMove.org's founders, Julian and Max.
Albanese is an interesting study - no wonder TruthMove is harassing Nico Haupt, because HE'S BLOWING THE WHISTLE ON TRUTHMOVE.ORG'S INTELLIGENCE CONNECTIONS:
Another interesting quote is:
The Story was originally broken by DOG4TREE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE and was subsequently published on http://kv3ri.blogspot.com and mirrored on intelligence sites around the world.
This is a grandiose statement in the extreme. It is highly doubtful that valid intelligence sites would be repeating unsubstantiated speculations wrapped in disco porn hit videos. It would be helpful to know who Dog4tree is. This might give an insight to the motives and methodology behind these attacks. A Google search of Dog4Tree reveals this link:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/911InsideJobbers/mes...
Possibly indicating Dog4tree is Webfairy. If true this would match the disjointed and specious style of the various attacks which now include Truthmove.org.
What did Truthmove do to anybody to get this attention? This came out of the blue!
Or it seems so. Going back in time to the Kennebunkport scandal, most of the 911activists attacked as "WQ2RX" were part of Truthaction. What did Truthaction do? Defend anti war activists under attack. This appears to have coincided with a plan to drive a wedge between the anti war movement and the peace movement. Whether the attacks on members of Truthaction were pure revenge or an attack to neutralize future interference is hard to say.
So, examining the model, what recent event appears to have presaged this new "WQ2RX" accusation? Seems to be two candidates: expressing concern over 9/11 Independent Citizens Commission:
http://www.truthmove.org/forum/topic/871
And concerns about the promotion of Week of Truth:
http://www.truthmove.org/forum/topic/985
It both of these cases members of Truthmove were offering very strong criticism of individuals participating in these projects and some of the strategies being used.
Whatever your opinions on these issues, we can all agree that accusations of being "Al Qaida" members, attempts to invade privacy and the rest are not on.
This is a very sophisticated operation and has many levels. Last fall they started out with mixing garbage info with their intended targets. Then they narrow their focus to the people they were trying to intimidate out of activism--that has to be the goal, right?
Another aspect is mini-false flags--"Look they're doing it to me--I'm on your side!". U2R2H was the first and clumsiest of these attempts last fall. More successful attempts have telling signs:
-the person under "attack" alternates between outrage and indifference about the attack. They discourage any attempts at investigation. In short they do not act like someone under attack. Their job is to manipulate the people really under attack, gain their confidence, and, hopefully use what ever they learn to help the attackers. This explains why they need to express a minimum amount of outrage to gain sympathy, but at the same time claim they "aren't impressed".
a subtle variation of the mini-false flag, is running to your defense, but in such a way that it actually backs up and reinforces the original attacks.
these people's true colors are exposed when they are cut off and their job is no longer possible. They will then mimic almost exactly the behavior of the primary attackers. At this point their aim appears to be provoking an outraged response to muddle the chain of custody and hide the intent of their actions. If they can do this, it is very hard for an outside observer to judge who the real attacker(s) are.
other tactics to manipulate people under attack include suggesting it is a hoax, or a joke, when the minimum research will reveal a deliberate intelligence behind these actions.
another tactic used is the refrain "ignore it". But this can also be used by sincere people who misunderstand motives. They need to understand attacks like these are not compulsive pathological attention seeking. This type of behavior is deliberate coordination masked as attention seeking and/or crazy behavior.
At this point I'm going to indulge in some capital letters:
THE RETURN OF WQ2RX ACCUSATIONS COMBINED WITH NICO HAUPT'S ASSAULT ON SABRINA AT GROUND ZERO MAKE IT THUNDERINGLY CLEAR THAT IGNORING THE PROBLEM OF ATTACKS ON 911 ACTIVISTS WILL NOT MAKE IT GO AWAY.
Ahem. Cheers for your indulgence.
So what to do? Document everything. Report any crime or attempted crime promptly to the appropriate authorities. Talk to a solicitor. Read this blog for other ideas.
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/2007/10/activis...
Be proactive. Beware of the "ally" who claims to be attacked to get your trust. And anyone who has all the facts yet tries to talk you out of effective action is not your ally.
This problem will not go away unless we make it go away. Or at least make it so public it has no power. And anyone who thinking false accusations of terrorism posted online can't have real world consequences, watch this video:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=UiqcyivJivE
To stop the effectiveness of these attacks it is important to draw attention to the issue while not adding any fuel to the fire or getting distracted from our activism. Prompt appropriate action should not give people engaging in these attacks and accusations the idea their intimidation attempts are successful.
It might help to think of the people behind the "WQ2RX" attacks as very naughty children (apologizes to real children). Bad behavior must be confronted and firm boundaries set. If bad behavior is not confronted it will never stop. With adult misbehavior this must include documentation and steps up to and including legal action to stop the behavior. It's not just a good idea; if we want more activist participation, then we have a responsibility to do what we can to prevent future attacks on activists.
First Truthaction. Now Truthmove. Who's next? Remember they're trying to hunt down individuals, not just the site...
Notes: Because these attack often include alleged home addresses and phone numbers, people should realize the law supports your right to privacy online. Unless you are a public figure (elected, work in a high profile business, an actor, etc) you can refuse to let someone use any information about your person or your name. Legally they are obligated to stop. This assumes that you yourself have not posted this information or it's connection to your activism online.
Claims that information posted about a person by third party(s)without their permission makes them a"public figure" is fallacious if it is known the information was posted without consent. Only the individual has the right to make that decision. As the video above shows you can be putting people's lives in danger, not just the person, but their friends and family.
There are cases where one may make an argument it is in the public good for people to know who X person is. The test of whether revealing a person information is appropriate: are they committing a crime? Are they a threat to public safety? If you can honestly answer "yes" to one of those questions, and you know the person's identification,you still should not be posting their information online as a first step.Your proper course is to report the incident to the police, the person allegedly threatened and/or an appropriate government agency or employer.
A person who fails to follow through with, or even make an attempt at, any tangible legal course available is using their alleged "concerns" as an excuse for their unethical actions.