Email exchange reveals liars at Veterans Today

On May 20, Anthony Lawson (right), the well-respected videomaker, sent an email to John Allen at Veterans Today and to 16 other recipients. I happened to be one of the sixteen. It read:

Hello John,

This is about the third time of asking:

Why am I being blocked from commenting on articles on Veterans Today?

This followed Jim Dean's disgusting personal attack on me, when he wrote in a comment in answer to one of mine:

"By that [sic] way, how are the kids in Bangkok? Still doing your research?"

As I wrote originally:

The disgusting innuendo is quite clear.  Mr Dean knows that I live in Thailand (but I do not live in Bangkok) and the inference in the phrase ". . . how are the kids in Bangkok?" clearly refers to the fact that pedophilia and other sex crimes against children is rife in Thailand, and the phrase:  "Still doing your research?" is a veiled and sickening accusation that I have ever had anything to do with this nauseating trade in human misery. 

This is not going away.  Dean should have been sacked from his position as managing editor for writing something like that in a publicly available comment. Instead, the person he made a savage verbal attack on is suddenly denied his right to comment on VT.  My login name and very simple 4-character password, that has worked for years, has been blocked ever since.What kind of show are you running?

Anthony Lawson

No answer from John Allen, but Gordo himself wrote to Allen and the rest of the names on the list:

On 20 May 2013 12:11, <[email protected]> wrote:
 Who is Lawson 911?

Lawson replied to all:

You know very well who I am, Mr Duff.  You've insulted and lied about me enough times, but then my full sign-off name:  *Anthony Lawson*, at the end of the email, should have given you, ace investigator, an even bigger clue.

Anthony Lawson

Duff replies to Lawson, and also to the entire list:

On 20 May 2013 20:12, <[email protected]> wrote:

And you wonder why you are banned from VT?
Could it be constant spamming, endless personal attacks on staff and your mysterious alignment with American groups we know to be fanatic Zionists?

Your bizarre theories are only exceeded by your lack of sound demeanor.

As for reading anything you write..to the end...I wouldn't wish that on anyone.

In fact, nobody has seen you involved in any activity other than ad hominem attacks on the staff at Veterans Today.  In fact, you attack the publication at every opportunity.

How is that working out for you?

Our terms of service are very specific on that issue.  We are not an open public forum, we are only for serious people.

I don't see you as one of those
g 

To which Lawson replied, again to the entire list:

Name them.  I am aligned to no groups whatsoever, let alone any fanatical Zionists.  You are a compulsive liar of the worst kind. I'd like to see you back up those accusations without making anything up. Don't forget you're on record as saying that 30 to 40% of what you write is based on false information, or words to that effect. You really need help and so do those who stick with you and your disgraceful excuse for a managing editor. [meaning Jim W. Dean -cy]

Anthony

At which point I couldn't resist supporting Anthony Lawson and quickly replied to his mail, hitting “reply to all:”

Anthony,

Isn't it always so interesting to note that VT presents itself as some kind of "freedom fighting", free speech, hurrah democracy kind of place that exposes all manner of corruption and govt. hijinks. What it doesn't want exposed is itself (!) and its "Jew Protection" racket.

There are a lot of Internet sites for that purpose; they each look and sound a little different. But VT is so obvious once one gets past the glitzy "inside information" pretense, as you have done long ago.

No self-respecting person would be reading this rag. Why are you doing so, Anthony? VT should be attacked and exposed at every opportunity, but not on its own pages.

Carolyn

To which I received this unwelcome reply from Jim W. Dean:

Quoting [email protected]:

Dear Carolyn, Thank you for the lovely compliment, coming from a person like you. You could do stand up comedy if money ever gets tights. I will reccomend (sic) you. I have taken the liberty of putting it into by (sic) 'best of' folder with other similar gems.

Excuse me for taking the liberty of not copying/spamming the list as both you and Anthony seem to view email lists spamming as your main reading audience.

I just googled  "carolyn yeager"

About 40,500 results   (0.26 seconds)

"Jim W. Dean"

About 3,030,000 results  (0.15 seconds)

I certainly am no household name by any means...but you just make a fool out of yourself with your pitiful attempts to trash VT. Like Anthony it is an obvious attempt to salvage some visibility, piggybacking those doing the heavy lifting (determined by results) by taking cheap shots. The internet seems to have a growing number of these, all with low Google numbers.

Enjoy being lost in your time warp. You may have been well meaning at some point in the past, but it is all bitterness now over your own failure, and your attempts to fawn that off. The readers, BTW, see right through this...as reflected in your Google numbers considering how long you have been around. One expects more from an experienced senior citizen. We are supposed to set good examples for the young people.

My reply ---

To Gordo and Jim: You guys are sick. Like little kids, with your "rating" wars. I just googled Carolyn Yeager = About 1,200,000 results (0.23 seconds).

Something wrong with your googler? I'm happy to have caused you to spend the time from your hi-level activities (lol) to put together all the below.

You are compulsive, inveterate liars as AL [Lawson] said. And many others [say that too]. That's why your site is a rag. You certainly don't have the writers you used to have, do you? They are all 3rd rate [now].

And talk about senior citizens! I am at least fit, unlike your repulsively fat selves. Well, continue having (your kind of) fun.

Which caused Gordo himself to jump in with his favorite topic:

Carolyn who?

 Gordon Duff (24.8 million Google citations)

At this point, I hear from Kevin Barrett:

Carolyn, Your website, with its gargantuan audience, should be a great place to attack VT. That'll teach Jew-lovin' Gordon a lesson. 

____________________________________

I will return to Kevin and our exchange in a separate posting. Here, I'll now continue with the thread of Jim Dean's instruction to me concerning "googling." He writes:

You have to use quotation marks....which then requires that Carolyn and Yeager follow each other. I used the W. early on to eliminate all the other Jim Dean's from inflating my count. Following this is not an ego thing. We use it mainly to track article titles to know how many times our work is being copied and pasted on other websites and blogs, where most of the readership takes place.

If you use it without the quotations the count inclued (sic) all the postings with Carolyn in then (sic) and all those with Yeager.

You can test this with anyone's name to see the difference. It is a common mistake. I did not know for a couple of years. Mine, BTW, has a big bump because of a new article on the Russian fleet deployment. Again, thanks for the wonderful compliment.

You guys are sick. Like little kids, with your "rating" wars. I just  
googled Carolyn Yeager == About 1,200,000 results (0.23 seconds)

After a little checking, I replied to “Jim W. Dean” with this:

Googling "Jim W. Dean" I come up with
About 313,000 results (0.30 seconds)

And you are not the only Jim W. Dean there is, for sure.

So what is “Jim W. Dean”'s answer to that?

Oh....google had a glitch this morning...adding three zeros. 

I have the number one article ( a good day of course) on PressTV today...and was suspicious that it was not pulling that big a bump, but the glitch came up three times.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/05/20/304416/russian-med-fleet-warning...

As I said, it is the 'delta' number which is your exposure indicator. If there is someone showing up on page 1000 it is insignificant. It's when you find them in the top five or ten pages is where you have a count distortion. You can easily check this with your own name. Dig down through the first ten pages of links. That will give you a quick and a reasonably good indication.

"Abe Foxman" is only    About 155,000 results  with all the years he has been around.

Everybody active on the Net needs to be tracking their google numbers.

03-20-13 About 346,000 results

03-23-13 About 345,000 results

03-31-13 About 331,000 results

04-09-13 About 304,000 results

04-13-13 About 321,000 results

04-14-13 About 325,000 results

04-18-13 About 349,000 results

04-19-13 About 358,000 results

04-30-13 About 470,000 results

05-04-13 About 457,000 results

05-09-13 About 466,000 results

05-13-13 About 398,000 results

05-20-13 About 313,000 results

Google had a glitch! Just when he was checking his numbers, it added three zeros!! Gosh, how often does that happen? These guys think people won't check them out so they simply lie like jewish holohoax survivors. When someone calls them on it, they just resort to something like this. It was someone else's fault! LOL.

Jim. W. Dean wants me to know I can trust him. After all, he gets on Press TV.

My response to Jim was:

What the f--k? Now Google had a glitch, adding 3 zeros!! Funny, funny. I'm glad I have an email record of this.

"Again, the key number is not the count itself but how it is going up and down based on your activity and its moving around the Net."

If you follow all this, you knew the 3 million plus number wasn't real. Why claim it? Because you thought, or fat Gordo thought, I would just accept it. And the others on the list might too. You are both such Jewish operators. Unbelievable liars.

To which Jim finished up (in blue) thusly and disappeared:

Oh gosh yes...you could write article (sic) for years...some new material. But who would read them Carolyn? Who reads Anothny's? (sic) I'll give you a hint. When people send personal email replies out to a list, they are hold up a sign that they have bottomed out. It's the most pitiful thing you can do on the Internet. Again, the key number is not the count itself but how it is going up and down based on your activity and its moving around the Net.

Again, thank you for your wonderful comments. Seeing how you have so much time, why don't you ask Google for me why they goosed my numbers this morning?

Thanks for the help. I am blocking your email now. Goodbye madam.

As you can see, having been exposed as a liar in his “google counts,” Jim forgets that and turns to “my crime” of replying to the entire list that was sent to me -- a list to which Gordo also replied.

At one point, Gordo sent this

Carolyn,

 I have always suspected that you must be working for the Zionists as your racism, the Walmart culture version, is an embarrassment to the rest of us.

 However, I believe the public can and should be able to hear anything it wants and has the right to follow who it chooses.

 Thus, I simply don't care.

 I find it curious that your politics put you directly in line with the same people that Adelson funds.

Can you explain?

 g

Haha. It's always the Zionists with Gordo. 'They' are his only stated enemy, along with the Republicans, in this, his “undercover” operation against the right of nations to exist.

If you recall, he began with accusing Anthony Lawson of being aligned with fanatical Zionists.

Duff is only a joke, folks, and the sooner you accept that, the better off you will be.

Notice also the “I simply don't care” followed by “Can you explain?” He can't remember from one minute to the next what he's talking about, or what he just said.

I hope you enjoyed this little excursion into the mind of the folks who run Veterans Today. It certainly won't be coming again any time soon.  In the meantime, look here. Your faithful correspondent ~ Carolyn Yeager