It has come to my attention that Lestat (@ATafoyovsky), an associate of WikiLeaks supporters, Jesselyn Radack and Beth Bogaerts, is now targeting U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture, Nils Melzer, who has worked tirelessly on Julian Assange’s case. Melzer and investigative journalist, Stefania Maurizi, are probably the two individuals I respect the most in the WikiLeaks community so I find this latest disinformation campaign coming out of Lestat’s camp especially vile.
If you’re familiar with how Lestat and his associates operate and the insane disinformation he pushes virtually every day, then you already know that he’s basically saying in the above tweet that because Melzer is appearing in a forum with Ray McGovern, who was a regular guest on #Unity4J, this proves that Melzer is also tied to #Unity4J which, according to Lestat, is a Qanon influencer; thus, Melzer must publicly denounce all of these people or risk being painted as a Qanon influencer, as well. Naturally, he’s also trying to implicate WikiLeaks in the entire sordid affair. That’s how fundamentally disturbed this guy is.
But this should come as no surprise because Lestat has a history of defaming both WikiLeaks and Assange, probably with delusions of grandeur and being hailed a hero, similar to when Bogaerts admitted she was trying to make a name for herself by ferreting out moles within the whistleblower community. What I don’t understand is why this drama queen has to lie and manufacture everything when there are legitimate complaints to be had about WikiLeaks/Assange.
Anyone following The Rabbit Files and what I’ve exposed is familiar with this circle of actors, their associates, and even their former associates, and the number of disinformation and/or controlled opposition campaigns they’ve put into circulation, including some that targeted WikiLeaks and others that made them look like chumps because even they bought into it. They’ve also been used to social engineer activists, divide supporters, and silence effective, sane voices.
Make no mistake, #Unity4J was an abusive, fashy dumpster fire and Suzie Dawson is kinda a horrible person that some of us took a beating for exposing (you’re welcome), which takes us to what someone said to me the other day, “Everyone thinks you hate WikiLeaks.” And here’s what I have to say to that:
If I hated WikiLeaks why in the living fuck would I consistently go through the hassle and abuse of exposing those that have ruined support for both them and Julian Assange?
Assange knows that I have well-researched and well-sourced articles. He retweeted at least six of them. WikiLeaks also knows that I do because they retweeted some of them after Assange was gagged. It’s not my problem that supporters and WikiLeaks of all people want to bury their heads in the sand when unpleasant truths or a mountain of evidence is presented that they don’t particularly like or want to deal with.
I was one of the first to publicly voice my concerns about Dawson and #Unity4J within the Assange support community (activists tried to warn others during Dawson’s Occupy Auckland days and nobody listened back then either), and I warned ya’ll about Elizabeth Mueller years ago.
I also publicly supported and agreed with everyone’s concerns about @GreekEmmy (and published some of my own) and guess what? We were right. She’s yet another abusive lunatic that has single handedly destroyed Assange support for almost a decade and dished out more censorship than anyone I know.
I was also one of a very few that stood by Class Conscious and Davey Heller’s side when he courageously put pen to paper about #Unity4J’s open fascism/Trump policy that made a mockery of WikiLeaks and the movement as a whole. We never wavered or sold out to pressure despite routinely encountering Dawson-led mobs that repeatedly called us feds, Heller taking the brunt of the abuse; #Unity4J attack dogs who tried to take credit for, bury, or discredit our pro-Assange campaigns and articles; and Jesselyn Radack hijacking our work to further propagate her fake rape victim narrative. And yes, we were right.
I called out Beth Bogaerts for exactly what she was two years ago and I was right. And then I exposed how she and her associates have been running disinfo/defamation campaigns against activists and journalists for years while using their personal problems to further tarnish the support community.
I’ve put myself at risk for exposing Ray Johansen and Aaron Kesel’s pathologically dishonest and abusive behavior towards supporters—especially female activists. And late in the game I exposed Jesselyn Radack’s “I was raped but not really” campaign which has been used as a disinformation and harassment launching pad FOR THE LAST SIX YEARS to divide support, ruin reputations, and silence anti-fascist activists. Kinda like how Dawson always uses, “The CIA tried to murder my family ten million times” to grift for money.
So I ask you, WikiLeaks, how does this show I hate you and how have any of these actors helped your reputation? Right. They haven’t and they make it look like you run an asshole factory. Meanwhile, they’re running off well-meaning, mentally balanced (I know, that’s a tough one for you guys), thoughtful, and intelligent activists.
Do you think I expose deceitful, manipulative, and even dangerous bad actors in YOUR community for my benefit? In case you haven’t noticed, there is no personal benefit. I do it so YOUR supporters can stay safe and in the hopes you’ll help clean up the mess you contributed to so less people despise you. When it comes to freeing Assange—or even building a powerful movement to free Assange—you have a ten-year record of total failure so maybe ya’ll should take some unwanted advice.
I don’t hate WikiLeaks. Far from it. They revolutionized journalism, research, and the work of historians. They also exposed war crimes, corporate malfeasance, and their courage and achievements blow my mind. In that regard, they don’t get nearly the recognition they deserve but…
In the last 4-5 years that I’ve been around I’ve realized that the #1 rule of WikiLeaks’ Fight Club For Julian is that his safety and well-being is the only thing that matters. Yes, the government wants him dead but WikiLeaks and Stella Moris are well aware that innocent supporters have been threatened, harassed, intimidated, defamed, almost pushed to suicide, and completely censored by bad actors within their community and they’ve remained SILENT (except the @DefendAssange account who once privately tried to pressure me over Dawson because good times).
And no, I’m not talking about former members of Shadowbox, Cicada 3301, or their associates and their whiny tantrums about how the Assange support community is an abusive environment because Thomas Schoenberger was mean to them. Fuck right off with that fed infiltration nonsense. Until WikiLeaks starts retweeting Schoenberger, nobody cares about your histrionic personality disorder.
The point being is that supporters are just as human as Assange and we all have families. We have parents and/or loved ones that would be devastated if anything happened to us. We have brothers or sisters that love us very much, and many have children that would be lost without them. And yet, WikiLeaks’ total lack of silence about what goes on in their own support community—which they have absolutely, without question, and provably been involved in—reflects a disturbing stance: They could care less if their own supporters face innumerable risks to their own safety and physical, emotional, and mental well-being, mostly at the hands of long term supporters/activists and gatekeepers.
I mean, has WikiLeaks or Stella Has Moris ever considered that some of their supporters have loved ones that are also suffering in prison, they’re also terrified that they won’t make it out alive, but despite this, they STILL take time out of their schedule to risk their own safety and well-being by involving themselves in one of the most toxic activist communities on the planet in support of Assange?
Or that well-meaning, non-abusive supporters have a lot going on in their own personal lives such as declining health, taking care of a disabled child, living with an abusive partner, or struggling to make ends meet and that the last thing they need are fellow Assange supporters (some of whom WikiLeaks promoted!) terrorizing them?
No, of course not. The only one worthy of safety and good health is Assange.
This is my biggest issue with WikiLeaks and it’s a legit one. I don’t hate WikiLeaks, I just hate how they operate on such a hypocritical and inhumane level. This is also one of the reasons, if not the biggest, why I rarely publish or tweet pro-Assange material anymore. If you don’t give a fuck about my safety or that of other supporters, you don’t deserve my website or twitter account’s real estate.
WikiLeaks could have easily stopped most of the abuse, defamation, threats, and open support for fascism in Assange’s name (a lot of which is still going on) but, again, they remain silent like cowards. I still wish them the best and I will always respect their work and revolutionary ideas, but I hope that one day they get their ego in check and realize that their supporters’ safety and well-being is just as important as that of their founder.
In case anyone’s interested, below is an article I wrote for Mintpress News about the work Nils Melzer has done for Assange. @GreekEmmy, Beth Bogaerts, and others worked very hard to get Melzer to delete the link to this and they succeeded—all because @GreekEmmy was outraged that I exposed a longtime WikiLeaks gatekeeper for lying about a series I wrote on Assange.
Also, Class Conscious has renewed their prison support campaign and is encouraging everyone to reach out to Assange—this time via email which is obviously much easier than writing a letter, making sure you have the right stamps, etc. I encourage everyone to take part in it.
Disclaimer: Ten thousand more pages of disclaimers to follow.
If you were mentioned in this article because your associate(s) did or said something stupid/dishonest, that’s not a suggestion that you did or said something stupid/dishonest or that you took part in it. Of course, some may conclude on their own that you associate with stupid/dishonest individuals but that’s called having the right to an opinion. If I’ve questioned something that doesn’t make sense to me, that’s not me spinning the confusing material you’ve put out. That’s me trying to make sense out of something that doesn’t make sense. And if I’ve noted that you failed to back up your allegations that means I either missed where you posted it or you failed to back your shiz up.
If I haven’t specifically stated that I believe (my opinion) someone is associated with someone else or an event, then it means just that. I haven’t reported an association nor is there any inference of association on my part. For example, just because someone is mentioned in this article, it doesn’t mean that they’re involved or associated with everyone and everything else mentioned. If I believe that there’s an association between people and/or events, I’ll specifically report it.
If anyone mentioned in this article wants to claim that I have associated them with someone else or an event because I didn’t disclose every single person and event in the world that they are NOT associated with, that’s called gaslighting an audience and it’s absurd hogwash i.e. “They mentioned that I liked bananas but they didn’t disclose that I don’t like apples. Why are they trying to associate me with apples???” Or something similar to this lovely gem, “I did NOT give Trish the thumb drive!” in order to make their lazy audience believe that it was reported they gave Trish the thumb drive when, in fact, that was never reported, let alone inferred.
That’s some of the BS I’m talking about so try not to act like a psychiatric patient, intelligence agent, or paid cyber mercenary by doing these things. If you would like to share your story, viewpoint, or any evidence that pertains to this article, or feel strongly that something needs to be clarified or corrected (again, that actually pertains to the article), you can reach me at firstname.lastname@example.org with any questions or concerns.
I cannot confirm and am not confirming the legitimacy of any messages or emails in this article. Please see a doctor if sensitivity continues. If anyone asks, feel free to tell them that I work for Schoenberger, Fitzgibbon, Steven Biss, the CIA, or really just about any intelligence agency because your idiocy, ongoing defamation, and failure as a human is truly a sight to behold for the rest of us.
If I described you as a fruit basket or even a mental patient it's because that is my opinion of you, it's not a diagnosis. I'm not a psychiatrist nor should anyone take my personal opinions as some sort of clinical assessment. Contact @BellaMagnani if you want a rundown on the psych profile she ran on you.
This is an Op-ed article. The information contained in this post is for general information purposes only. While we endeavor to keep the information up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the website or the information contained on the post for any purpose. The owner of this blog makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any information on this site or found by following any link on this site.
The views or opinions represented in this blog do not represent those of people, institutions or organizations that the owner may or may not be associated with in professional or personal capacity, unless explicitly stated. Any views or opinions are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, or individual.
The owner will not be liable for any errors or omissions in this information nor for the availability of this information. The owner will not be liable for any losses, injuries, or damages from the display or use of this information.