Filed Under: FooBird
FooBird Says: I noticed you retweeted Andrew Brietbart on the night of August 20th 3:13 pm and then later on you tweeted that you tweeted about a tweet about Neal Rauhshahusher and then I tweeted to @Anonybutt about it so I have conclusive proof that YOU ARE PART OF THE ILLUMINATI and also I deserve credit for being the grand poo bah of Twitter but only on the third weekend of every month because that's when my OCD meds wear off and if you don't help me right this minute expose the evil doings of the Bean Dogs I will by gum retweet that tweet you made about how you like boobs because clearly you are a pornographer but not the kind that's cool just the kind that has a moustache but not the good John Bolton kind I am referring to the John Stossell kind. I AM IMPORTANT EVEN IF I AM ANONYMOUS ON TWITTER CAN'T YOU TELL How dare you not twitter-converse with me for seventy hours straight while I pee in a jar because Howard Hughes kept his after he was abducted by the Mormon cultists PAY ATTENTION TO MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE(TM)
I've been thinking about foo birds and close screamers for the past few days. Here's why.
Last night I tweeted out articles on convicted terrorist bomber Brett Kimberlin and his "charity" work, which apparently includes utilizing "lawfare" to get conservative activists fired from their day jobs.
I am interested in this off-shoot of the "Twittergate" and "Weinergate" stories from 2010 for a few reasons.
First, neither "gate" has finished playing out. There is the question of the "swatting" of Mike Stack and Patterico. There is the question of who is funding Brett Kimberlin and his cronies, and why. There is the question of who or what funded and ran the Dan Wolfe operation (I'm more interested in this than most conservatives, who see it as a moot subject, but more on that another day).
Second, I believe that both "Twittergate" and "Weinergate" combine to create the most important political story of this new century. I don't think that adding the suffix "gate" is at all hyperbolic. I suspect that both "gates" go all the way to the White House. I believe that the Obama campaign has been actively attempting to harass conservative bloggers and activists both online and off in a 21st-century "Chicago Way," a creepy and disturbing trend in politics that touches each and every person who has ever used Facebook or Twitter.
Let's just call the whole thing "SocialMediaGate" to make it easier.
Ever tweeted or facebooked a story negative to Obama? How much do you want to bet your name is in a database, and some sociopathic creep with bad hygiene and some donation dollars from Barbara Streisand spent a few minutes drooling over his computer screen, trying to decide if you were a soft enough target to harass online -- or off? Just to make you an example, as Aaron Walker the blogger was?
That's not just Chicago-Way tactics, that's straight out Gestapo tactics retooled for social media.
So yes, I think the story is important enough to disseminate, and that's what I did yesterday and will continue to do.
Unfortunately the story hasn't gotten much traction yet, even after two years, for several reasons. First, a lot of the action has occurred on Twitter, which confuses most members of the media and law enforcement. Second, foo birds and close screamers have made the story very difficult for ordinary people to decode and comprehend.
What do I mean by that?
The "foo bird" is a mythical creature from New Orleans, sort of like the Phoenix. It flies around and around in a circle so fast it disappears up its own asshole.
The "close screamer" is sort of like the "close talker" of Seinfeld fame, only louder and more annoying. Not content to just invade your personal space and talk to you, the "close screamer" shouts schizophrenically in your ear. Because what he or she has to say is just so GODDAMN IMPORTANT. If you meet a close-screamer on the street, you do not argue with this person or try to explain to them that they may need to seek psychiatric help. You walk away as quickly as possible.
If you can genetically breed, within your imagination, the foo bird to the close screamer, sprinkle in a dash of autism and OCD, add in a liberal helping of anonymity, and a whole lot of drama, then you may be able to grasp the prototypical caliber of person who has been involved in this story from its inception - on both the liberal and the conservative side. One creepy anonymous Twitter account tweets THIS, another tweets THAT, and it's all just paranoid gibberish.
Last night, after tweeting out some links to articles on the story, I had some of these foo birds come at me, screeching about Neal Rauhauser, Bean Dogs, who told Andrew Breitbart what and when and by gum I better not tweet about TwitterGate unless I read this tweet HERE or THERE and blah blah.
My advice to all foo birds everywhere: if you think you have something to contribute to the story, and want to be taken seriously, ditch the anonymous Twitter account and take it to a blog. If you don't have the guts to put your real name out there and stand by what you write, you're just noise. And make the blog coherent. No rambling. No cyber drama. And take your meds and go outside, you probably have a vitamin D deficiency.
Until then, if you close-scream at me with a bunch of paranoid foo-bird coming out of your ears, I'm blocking you on Twitter.
Update 1: When I say that I suspect that both "gates" may go all the way to the WH, I do not mean that I think the effort to expose Weiner (the Dan Wolfe operation) was run by the WH. That's prima fascia silly. No, I am referring to the continuing ongoing effort to discover who ran the Dan Wolfe operation. Inquiring progbots still want to know who did it, where they are, and more importantly, how to expose and hence, prevent "them" from doing it again.
Update 2: And yes, yes, there are plenty of freelance prog operators trying to track down who DW was for fame, glory and profit.
Update 3: It remains to be seen if Kimberlin et. al. are freelancers wholly separate from the WH crowd, or are doing it for the WH directly with some measure of legal plausible deniability built in. Money is fungible, after all.
contact ladd @ filmladd dot com