The AIM disinformation campaign consisted of a series of small lies fabricated to support the big lie that “His values, passed on to Obama, were those of a communist agent who pledged allegiance to Stalin” (see http://www.aim.org/aim-column/media-excuse-obamas-false-advertising). A painstakingly documented analysis of Kincaid’s falsehoods is posted as “specific misrepresentation” at http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/Kaleokualoha/gGxdvX . I
invite any person of integrity to refute my evidence against his body of lies. If he had authentic evidence of my father’s radical influence, he would not need to fabricate such evidence.

As a fair-minded thinker, you may be interested in this cordial exchange between myself and Max Friedman, Cliff Kincaid’s researcher: http://pajamasmedia.com/phyllischesler/2009/05/31/judge-sonia-sotomayor-and-singing-sensation-susan-boyle/#comment-13017. (Only the last few comments pertain to this situation.) Please note that Max agreed to follow through with Cliff Kincaid regarding the specific misrepresentation I had identified in June. Not a peep was heard from him since then.

BTW: As a retired Air Force Intelligence Officer with specific training in Deception Analysis by the C.I.A. in 1989, I was VERY lucky to be familiar with disinformation campaigns, including Pope Gregory’s misrepresentation of Mary Magdalene, Russian and German misrepresentation of Judaism, Operation Fortitude protecting the D-Day invasion, Operation Left Hook protecting the coalition drive into Kuwait, and the misrepresentation of the Iraqi threat this century. This disinformation campaign fits the pattern epitomized by “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” where a target is smeared through deliberate misrepresentation. Relying on unsubstantiated claims of mentorship to implicate Obama makes no more sense than relying on Curveball’s unsubstantiated claims of mobile weapons labs to implicate Iraq.

Thanks for your consideration.

“The way to combat noxious ideas is with other ideas. The way to combat
falsehoods is with truth.” – William O. Douglas

BTW: The fact that my post was accepted in three pieces, rather than one long post, suggests your blogger software has an undisclosed length limit. It would be nice if the software actually notified posters of length limitations. Thanks again!
.-= Kaleokualoha´s last blog ..Closing the Circle (18 January 2009) =-.

The AIM disinformation campaign consisted of a series of small lies fabricated to support the big lie that “His values, passed on to Obama, were those of a communist agent who pledged allegiance to Stalin” (see http://www.aim.org/aim-column/media-excuse-obamas-false-advertising). A painstakingly documented analysis of Kincaid’s falsehoods is posted as “specific misrepresentation” at http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/Kaleokualoha/gGxdvX . I
invite any person of integrity to refute my evidence against his body of lies. If he had authentic evidence of my father’s radical influence, he would not need to fabricate such evidence.

As a fair-minded thinker, you may be interested in this cordial exchange between myself and Max Friedman, Cliff Kincaid’s researcher: http://pajamasmedia.com/phyllischesler/2009/05/31/judge-sonia-sotomayor-and-singing-sensation-susan-boyle/#comment-13017. (Only the last few comments pertain to this situation.) Please note that Max agreed to follow through with Cliff Kincaid regarding the specific misrepresentation I had identified in June. Not a peep was heard from him since then.

BTW: As a retired Air Force Intelligence Officer with specific training in Deception Analysis by the C.I.A. in 1989, I was VERY lucky to be familiar with disinformation campaigns, including Pope Gregory’s misrepresentation of Mary Magdalene, Russian and German misrepresentation of Judaism, Operation Fortitude protecting the D-Day invasion, Operation Left Hook protecting the coalition drive into Kuwait, and the misrepresentation of the Iraqi threat this century. This disinformation campaign fits the pattern epitomized by “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” where a target is smeared through deliberate misrepresentation. Relying on unsubstantiated claims of mentorship to implicate Obama makes no more sense than relying on Curveball’s unsubstantiated claims of mobile weapons labs to implicate Iraq.

Thanks for your consideration.

“The way to combat noxious ideas is with other ideas. The way to combat
falsehoods is with truth.” – William O. Douglas

BTW: The fact that my post was accepted in three pieces, rather than one long post, suggests your blogger software has an undisclosed length limit. It would be nice if the software actually notified posters of length limitations. Thanks again!
.-= Kaleokualoha´s last blog ..Closing the Circle (18 January 2009) =-.

RESPONSE: Based on the sequence of events, I believe that Hamden colluded with AIM’s Cliff Kincaid in this misrepresentation. It was actually written quite well from a disinformation perspective, although it may violate the Code of Ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists. To wit:

Frank Marshall Davis wrote a scandalous memoir-novel under the pseudonym Bob Greene, one chapter of which is devoted to fictional character Bob Greene and his wife having sex with a thirteen year old girl. This fact was as accurately reported on August 24, 2008 by Toby Hamden on a British website
(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2601914/Frank-Marshall-Davis-alleged-Communist-was-early-influence-on-Barack-Obama.html). From this kernel of truth, however, a deceptive house of cards was constructed:

1. FALSE ATTRIBUTION: According to Hamden, “Mr. Davis (writing as Greene) explains that although he has “changed names and identities…all incidents I have described have been taken from actual experiences.”

a. Please note that the fictional character Bob Greene, not author Davis, alleges that incidents were taken from actual experiences. Even Hamden’s travesty of journalism only stated that Mr. Davis confirmed that he was the author, not that the events actually occurred in Davis’s life.

b. Casual readers of Hamden’s story may not have noticed his sleight of hand (fallacy of equivocation) when substituting author Davis for fictional character Bob Greene as the subject of experiences in the book. In this one statement, Hamden shifted the identity of subject “he” from Greene to Davis, thereby indicating that Greene’s story actually happened to Davis. This deception, however, reveals Hamden’s intent to directly smear Davis and thereby indirectly smear Obama through guilt-by-association.

2. ESCALATION #1: On the same day (August 24) Hamden’s report was published, so-called “Accuracy In Media” (AIM) published a new report citing Hamden’s story. (AIM had already published numerous reports defaming Frank Marshall Davis starting in February 2008.) AIM now reported that Edgar Tidwell, an “expert in the life and writing of Davis,” confirmed that Frank Marshall Davis wrote “Sex Rebel: Black” as a semi-autobiographical novel. Despite Tidwell’s expert opinion that the novel was SEMI-autobiographical, AIM escalated accusations against Davis by claiming he was a sex pervert (http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-red-mentor-was-a-pervert/) based on Hamden’s same-day report. Kincaid falsely attributed the “pervert” claim to Hamden’s report.

3. ESCALATION #2: On 14 October, AIM again escalated the charges by falsely claiming Davis was an “admitted child molester” (http://www.aim.org/aim-column/was-a-communist-obamas-sex-teacher/).

4. SUMMARY: Evidence strongly suggests that Hamden and AIM worked together on this story before either post was published on August 24: AIM’s post referenced Hamden’s story although both were published the same day. Further, AIM’s false attribution of the “pervert” claim to Hamden’s story suggests AIM referenced Hamden’s draft rather than a final version.

RESPONSE: Based on the sequence of events, I believe that Hamden colluded with AIM’s Cliff Kincaid in this misrepresentation. It was actually written quite well from a disinformation perspective, although it may violate the Code of Ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists. To wit:

Frank Marshall Davis wrote a scandalous memoir-novel under the pseudonym Bob Greene, one chapter of which is devoted to fictional character Bob Greene and his wife having sex with a thirteen year old girl. This fact was as accurately reported on August 24, 2008 by Toby Hamden on a British website
(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2601914/Frank-Marshall-Davis-alleged-Communist-was-early-influence-on-Barack-Obama.html). From this kernel of truth, however, a deceptive house of cards was constructed:

1. FALSE ATTRIBUTION: According to Hamden, “Mr. Davis (writing as Greene) explains that although he has “changed names and identities…all incidents I have described have been taken from actual experiences.”

a. Please note that the fictional character Bob Greene, not author Davis, alleges that incidents were taken from actual experiences. Even Hamden’s travesty of journalism only stated that Mr. Davis confirmed that he was the author, not that the events actually occurred in Davis’s life.

b. Casual readers of Hamden’s story may not have noticed his sleight of hand (fallacy of equivocation) when substituting author Davis for fictional character Bob Greene as the subject of experiences in the book. In this one statement, Hamden shifted the identity of subject “he” from Greene to Davis, thereby indicating that Greene’s story actually happened to Davis. This deception, however, reveals Hamden’s intent to directly smear Davis and thereby indirectly smear Obama through guilt-by-association.

2. ESCALATION #1: On the same day (August 24) Hamden’s report was published, so-called “Accuracy In Media” (AIM) published a new report citing Hamden’s story. (AIM had already published numerous reports defaming Frank Marshall Davis starting in February 2008.) AIM now reported that Edgar Tidwell, an “expert in the life and writing of Davis,” confirmed that Frank Marshall Davis wrote “Sex Rebel: Black” as a semi-autobiographical novel. Despite Tidwell’s expert opinion that the novel was SEMI-autobiographical, AIM escalated accusations against Davis by claiming he was a sex pervert (http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-red-mentor-was-a-pervert/) based on Hamden’s same-day report. Kincaid falsely attributed the “pervert” claim to Hamden’s report.

3. ESCALATION #2: On 14 October, AIM again escalated the charges by falsely claiming Davis was an “admitted child molester” (http://www.aim.org/aim-column/was-a-communist-obamas-sex-teacher/).

4. SUMMARY: Evidence strongly suggests that Hamden and AIM worked together on this story before either post was published on August 24: AIM’s post referenced Hamden’s story although both were published the same day. Further, AIM’s false attribution of the “pervert” claim to Hamden’s story suggests AIM referenced Hamden’s draft rather than a final version.

Thanks!! I was wondering when you would connect the dots. You might be surprised to know that I never even ventured into the blogosphere until a friend surprised me with the news that my father was mentioned in Obama’s book, and the uproar it caused: Redbaiting, race-baiting, and now accusations of child rape, where my father is misrepresented as an avowed communist, racist, and criminal monster, in the creation of a straw man through which Obama is easy to attack through guilt-by-association.

My father was no angel, but he was nothing like the virtual monster created by “Accuracy In Media” (AIM firebrand Cliff Kincaid and others, through their disinformation campaign documented and deconstructed as “specific misrepresentation” in my “Redbaiting Barack Obama” post at http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/Kaleokualoha/gGxdvX . I am willing to answer any relevant question to the best of my ability.

YOU WROTE: “So, tell me, what parts were factual and what parts were fictional? And why didn’t he come out and explain that he didn’t actually have sex with that 13 year old?”

RESPONSE: There is no possible way to know how much of the story he actually experienced. As a work of fiction, however, NONE of the events can be literally attributed to his life. I believe he didn’t “come out and explain that he didn’t have sex with that 13 year old” because he was never asked about it, just as Nabokov never had to deny that HE had sex with Lolita, and just as other authors do not have to deny that THEY did not personally experience events in their novels. Fiction writers are rarely accused of personally committing offenses they write about. (Stephen King could be jailed for life if he committed a fraction of the offenses in his books!) It is much more common for nonfiction writers to be accused of fabrication.

Thanks!! I was wondering when you would connect the dots. You might be surprised to know that I never even ventured into the blogosphere until a friend surprised me with the news that my father was mentioned in Obama’s book, and the uproar it caused: Redbaiting, race-baiting, and now accusations of child rape, where my father is misrepresented as an avowed communist, racist, and criminal monster, in the creation of a straw man through which Obama is easy to attack through guilt-by-association.

My father was no angel, but he was nothing like the virtual monster created by “Accuracy In Media” (AIM firebrand Cliff Kincaid and others, through their disinformation campaign documented and deconstructed as “specific misrepresentation” in my “Redbaiting Barack Obama” post at http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/Kaleokualoha/gGxdvX . I am willing to answer any relevant question to the best of my ability.

YOU WROTE: “So, tell me, what parts were factual and what parts were fictional? And why didn’t he come out and explain that he didn’t actually have sex with that 13 year old?”

RESPONSE: There is no possible way to know how much of the story he actually experienced. As a work of fiction, however, NONE of the events can be literally attributed to his life. I believe he didn’t “come out and explain that he didn’t have sex with that 13 year old” because he was never asked about it, just as Nabokov never had to deny that HE had sex with Lolita, and just as other authors do not have to deny that THEY did not personally experience events in their novels. Fiction writers are rarely accused of personally committing offenses they write about. (Stephen King could be jailed for life if he committed a fraction of the offenses in his books!) It is much more common for nonfiction writers to be accused of fabrication.