Barbara Hartwell

My photo
Independent Investigator, Intelligence Analyst, Journalist. Former CIA (NOC, Psychological Operations) Black Ops Survivor. Sovereign Child of God. Minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ (Ordained 1979, D.Div.) Exposing Government Lies, Crimes, Corruption, Conspiracies and Cover-ups.

Wednesday, November 29, 2006

RETROSPECTIVE ON A MAN OF DISHONOR

 
Why I Am NOT A Todd Brendan Fahey Fan.

Once upon a time, a few years back, before my eyes were open to the ghastly truth about Todd Brendan Fahey, I wrote a brief piece titled: Why I Am A Todd Brendan Fahey Fan.

This little accolade was first posted on a commercial site called Rumor Mill News. (I resigned from RMN due to their practice of selective censorship and other dishonorable policies, in November 2003.)

Todd Fahey, one of RMN's "news agents" (as he remains to this day) being the egomaniac he is, grabbed it and reposted it on every other site available to him. At the time, I didn't understand why he considered having "fans" of his work so important. Now, in hindsight, I do. Fahey's credibility has been shot to hell. I wouldn't believe a thing Fahey said if he were the last "news source" on the face of the Earth. As you read on, you will discover why...

Time has moved on, but Fahey is again reposting this same old piece like crazy, evidently in attempts to bolster his flagging ego and restore any small amount of credibility he may once have enjoyed among the right wing conservative and "patriot" element who populate the Internet.

It is clear that Fahey is desperate to remind the public that Barbara Hartwell was once one of his supporters. But that's yesterday's news --and it's OUT, just like yesterday's trash.

For all who may have read that ill-advised (on my part) piece, consider this report my vehement and wholehearted public retraction of the laudatory assessment and endorsement of Fahey's character, contained therein.

What's more, I now find it necessary --in fact a matter of great urgency-- to explain, in some detail, why I am NOT a Todd Brendan Fahey Fan. In having endorsed the credibility and character of this madman, Todd Brendan Fahey, I must admit: I was wrong. How very wrong I was and how profound a mistake I made!

Presently, there is only one issue of concern to me, as regards Todd Brendan Fahey: The fact that he has made it his mission to attempt to destroy me; to assassinate my character; to demonize me; to ruin my personal and professional reputation. And that, since July 2004, he has been waging a massive and vicious libel campaign which includes bearing false witness against me, disseminating the most outrageous of lies.

A SERIOUS ERROR IN JUDGMENT

In the spring of 2004 I made a serious error in judgment, actually one of the worst mistakes of my life, which I have since deeply regretted. I offered sanctuary in my home to someone I had never met, whom I did not really know, namely one Todd Brendan Fahey.

But after meeting Fahey in person and being subjected to his opportunistic, unscrupulous and utterly insane --there is no other word-- behavior in my own home (for which there were a number of witnesses, including several family members and the police officers who answered the 911 call I finally had to make to have Fahey removed from my property) I realized my mistake, for which I have suffered serious damages ever since.

Todd Brendan Fahey is nothing short of a raging psychopath. He is an unrepentant pathological liar. A degenerate alcoholic and drug abuser. A man who actually takes pride in such acts --committed with impunity-- as violations of privacy and security; theft; lying; stalking and even blackmail. A malicious provocateur; a sleazy lowlife...and then some....none of it good.

Todd Fahey is in fact a man of dishonor, the likes of which I have never known, nor hope to ever meet again.

FAHEY'S OBSESSION & DESCENT INTO MADNESS: A FINAL REPORT

This additional report on Todd Fahey is meant, once again, to set the record straight, with intent to counter the extensive and obsessive libel campaign he has perpetrated against me since July 2004.

I cannot hope to compete with the numerous high-traffic commercial websites owned by Fahey, nor the many others where he seems to be ever-present, posting his outrageous lies and malicious libel. It not my purpose to attempt such a thing. I have not the resources, the time, nor the stamina for such a task.
 
By the same token, I have refused to get embroiled in any point-counterpoint arguments with this lunatic. No sense arguing with a drunk or a madman; Fahey is both; though by his many sloppy hit-and-run style posts, taunting me with his ever-proliferating vile lies, it seems clear that is precisely what he has been trying to provoke me into doing.

Fahey's ploy hasn't worked. I don't run that kind of operation. Unlike Fahey, I rely on facts. I compile those facts, along with the testimony of reliable and credible witnesses, into a no-nonsense comprehensive report, with no fabrications; no contradictions; no inconsistencies; and a sober, reasoned analysis which anyone with eyes to see or ears to hear can comprehend.
 
Naturally that excludes Fahey, but then my reports are not written for his benefit, but rather in my own defense. They are written for the purpose of refuting the many falsehoods he promotes; exposing the psychopathology which spawned those falsehoods, with malice aforethought.

As for making my reports public, I have only my own unfunded and low-traffic site as a forum. My website has been off-line (at the time of this writing, October 2004) for over three months, a time frame which coincided with the height of Fahey's libel campaign. So be it. I can only hope that a few of those reading this --those who may see the truth and have the courage to stand up for justice-- might disseminate this report far and wide.

It looks as though Fahey's saturation of the market with his libelous falsehoods has paid off --for the time being anyway. But I will once again assure Fahey that he will not escape the consequences of his many nefarious actions; nor for the vile falsehoods about Barbara Hartwell he has made it his mission to perpetuate.

My primary weapon is the sword of truth, but along with righteous outrage and an unwavering commitment to seeing iniquity exposed and justice done, it has always worked well enough for me. I am nothing, if not ruthless to my enemies, when I have been grievously wronged. And Fahey has committed not just one, but many such grievous wrongs.

A POLITICAL REFUGEE? OR THE HOUSEGUEST FROM HELL?

But let me go back in time to July 2004. My health --already poor-- had deteriorated further due to the extreme stress and trauma inflicted on me by the unconscionable actions of this obsessive-compulsive drug addict; degenerate alcoholic lunatic, Todd Brendan Fahey, whom I have described in my two articles of July 2004 as "The Houseguest from Hell". (See articles displayed on the front page of my website for details of the whole sordid story of Fahey's ill-fated stay in my home.)

I provided safe haven for Fahey after he was arrested several times in Southeast Asia, seriously injured, and finally deported back to the U.S. from Thailand. He had put out public appeals for help; and at the time, I considered his situation to be that of a political prisoner, of sorts.

I had sincerely believed, based on my reading of his "patriotic" articles, as well as an intermittent three (3) year e-mail correspondence with him, that he was worthy of any support or help I could provide. Though I'd never met him in person, I had thought of him as a friend and political ally, as I believed him to be a fellow defender of the United States Constitution. I believed him to be a legitimate and trustworthy individual, a kindred spirit with common beliefs and goals.

As I was later to realize, I could not have been less correct --nor less judicious-- in my assessment of Todd Fahey. For as I learned to my great dismay, Fahey possessed none of those laudable or admirable traits; but was rather a psychotic pathological liar attempting to run a con game on anyone and everyone who would lend an ear to the tall tales he fabricated to gratify his ego; a conniving grandstander competing for the attention and approval he so desperately craved.

Fahey's fellow cyber-junkies, self-styled "patriots" and political hacks appear to have made up most of his admiring audience. I guess, in Fahey's scheme of things, it couldn't hurt to also gain the confidence of some legitimate folks like myself. I can only hope that for any other sincere patriots and genuine expositors of government corruption who may have been hoodwinked by Todd Fahey, this report will at least provide cause to reconsider their assessment of him.

A DRUNKEN LUNATIC, RUNNING AMOK: THE RED FLAGS I IGNORED

Perhaps, before offering my support to this person, I should have asked myself why it was that there was not another soul willing to extend solid assistance to him in his hour of need. Even his own parents were not willing to offer sanctuary to Todd Fahey; they had made it clear he was not really welcome in their home and had even set a time-limit of two weeks on any visit he might decide to make, the nature of his emergency situation notwithstanding. And this, despite the fact that Fahey had not seen his parents in over seven (7) years. There it was, Red Flag Number One.

Fahey blamed his parents for their "lack of concern" for him and bitterly complained that they "didn't understand" him, a sob story he told and retold, in an obvious ploy to gain my sympathy. On the contrary, it is clear they understood him all too well: As I learned from firsthand experience dealing with him, he is an out-of-control alcoholic who exhibits the behavior of a maniac, especially when he imagines he's been slighted in any way, which seems to be most of the time.

Fahey in fact has a long history of alcoholism, over twenty years, starting before his college years. His parents had to have him placed in an outpatient rehab facility because his drinking had become a serious problem for everyone around him, and also resulted in a series of arrests.

Something else where hindsight was 20-20: Fahey's public reports of the several bar brawls he was involved in, from which he sustained various injuries and which eventually led to to his last arrest and deportation from Thailand. Several of these reports contradicted each other as to the various events Fahey claims occurred and the dates of these episodes. True, I was biased in his favor at the time and concerned more about his immediate safety than sorting out the facts. Still, Red Flag Number 2.

Fahey's prolific and gratuitous use of obscene language in these reports also was disturbing to me, though I wrote it off at the time, attributing it to what I then believed to be his righteous anger against those he claimed were his assailants.

Using occasional profanity is one thing. Sometimes there's just no other way to make a point or vent rage against injustice. But Fahey's language was over the top. It was also misogynistic, as exemplified by his repeated use of vulgar epithets for female anatomy to describe his antagonists, who were without exception, male.

Of course, it didn't take long, being in his company, for me to realize that in fact Fahey hates women. I'd call him a closet misogynist, and as with most men of his ilk, his hatred is based on a fear of women and of the power he feels he has been deprived of by them. Classic misogynist psychopathology. Red Flag Number Three.

Fahey later also contradicted himself many times about the events in Southeast Asia when I spoke to him in person, in my attempts to debrief him. To this day I still don't have the facts: only Fahey's various versions of events, which he changed periodically, apparently to suit his own obscure purposes.

Or maybe in some cases he just didn't remember what really happened. Not surprising, due to his alcoholic blackouts, some of which I witnessed myself. Whatever...none of Fahey's misadventures, nor the various conflicting reports of them, are any longer of interest to me.

How I wish I had paid attention to these red flags before inviting him to my home! The red flags were certainly there. Other people saw them, including family members and friends who had read Fahey's increasingly bizarre postings. 
 
Unfortunately, I suffered from my own lack of discretion in seeing this madman for what he really is. But I now fully understand why even his own family would want little to do with him.

TREACHERY IN RETURN FOR KINDNESS AND CHRISTIAN CHARITY

In return for my kindness to him, and the considerable assistance I provided, at my own expense, in an attempt to save his life, which I sincerely believed was in danger, nutcase Fahey wreaked havoc in my life and at my home in Maine for three utterly miserable weeks, between June 14 and July 6th.

During this time my own life was put into a state of suspended animation, as I served as a combination babysitter/chauffer, driving Fahey back and forth to the hospital for his daily medical appointments; listened to his long-winded, self-pitying tales of woe; and tried my best to help him recover from his injuries as well as offering my professional services as an advocacy journalist for the "case" Fahey was so eager to get publicity for.

But Fahey could not have been less appreciative of my help, Christian charity (I mean that in the traditional sense, not treating him as a "charity case") and friendship. In fact, he abused any privileges he was given in my home and became downright treacherous when I and my family finally had enough and refused to put up with any more of his drunken, disrespectful, slovenly and ill-mannered behavior.

Fahey ruined the vacations of several family members, also visiting my home; showed no respect whatsoever for the privacy or personal boundaries of myself or my family; commandeered my computer for his own use (refusing to use his own laptop, which he had brought with him) and tampered with my personal computer, causing it to malfunction. I still haven't been able to afford to have it repaired.

Fahey destroyed my private property; stole whatever he could get away with before leaving; and drank literally every last drop of alcohol to be found in my house, all told costing me thousands of dollars in damages, which I have no way to get compensation for. And worst of all, drove me into a state of nervous exhaustion under the constant barrage of his lunatic behavior.

On the door of my icebox, I keep a little sign, meant for guests. It says:
 
Welcome Family and Friends. This is a Christian Spirit-Filled Home, where God's Love Rules. No ungodly behavior will be allowed!

Apparently, Fahey failed to read the sign. Maybe his vision was obscured by his perpetual state of drunkenness. Or more likely, he said to himself --the hell with it!...and just decided to ignore it.

It took me a full month (during which time I was able to do little else than relax on the beach near my home) after his ignominious departure, to finally recover from the worst of the traumatic stress inflicted on me by Todd Fahey.

But little did I realize, though Fahey was gone (thank God!) along with his demons --this is no joke, I and my family witnessed episodes of this demonic possession and I subsequently had to clear a host of unclean spirits out of my house! --and peace was restored to my home, Fahey's works of iniquity had apparently only just begun. The malicious libel campaign Fahey waged against me was soon to begin in earnest.

THE FACTS FAHEY DENIES, THE LIES HE PROMOTES

Now for some solid facts, most of which Fahey has since that time --in his prolific, vociferous and libelous public announcements-- twisted beyond recognition; denied the truth of; or blatantly lied about. He has also contradicted himself, being inconsistent in his various claims, in precisely the same manner as he did when relating the various events which took place in Southeast Asia. As I learned, lying is Fahey's primary stock-in-trade.

But here, for those who want the truth, are some irrefutable facts: Fahey had to be removed from my home by the Old Orchard Beach Police on the afternoon of July 4 for drunk and disorderly conduct; after making threats to a visiting relative, insisting he would "not leave peaceably" and uttering his drunken obscenities in front of my ten-year-old nephew, a sensitive child who later became distraught from the hostile and distressing environment fomented by Fahey in my normally peaceful home.

Subsequently, I was subjected to numerous harassing phone calls by Fahey and he finally returned to my property to stalk me on July 6, disregarding directives by myself and the police not to set foot on my property ever again; and had to be removed, once again, by the police. One police detective advised me to get a restraining order for my protection, so that Fahey could be arrested should he remain in the area and continue with his criminal harassment.

Fahey was admitted to a psychiatric ward shortly after the police removed him for the second time. He was again picked up by the police, passed out on a bench on a street in Old Orchard Beach; and had claimed in a raving e-mail to my friend ex-FBI agent Geral Sosbee (who had also tried to assist him) that he had made a failed suicide attempt with a massive overdose of drugs, of which he had brought a large supply (a veritable pharmacy in a canvas bag) with him from Southeast Asia.

This message to Sosbee (who is my witness) also contained the first of Fahey's libelous and obscene falsehoods against Barbara Hartwell.

THE LIBEL CAMPAIGN BEGINS: WITH MALICE AFORETHOUGHT

Fahey must have figured he hadn't done quite enough damage by his psychological abuses, violations of privacy and despicable, drunken behavior while staying in my home. He then felt the need to add gross insult to grievous injury and began publishing his lies from the pit of hell, libeling me and trashing my name all over the World Wide Web. Apparently those demons were working overtime.

Foremost --and by far the most damaging-- among the outrageous falsehoods being promoted by Todd Fahey are his claims that he "had sex with Barbara Hartwell". Although I have already refuted these falsehoods and exposed Fahey as a pathological liar, in two other public reports, I will state again, for the record: At no time did such an event occur. Not twice (per some of Fahey's lies). Not once. Not ever.

Fahey's claims are outlandish. That he would fabricate and promote such lies to the public, after the many other damages he had already inflicted on me and my family, enrages me to no end! And as anyone who has ever been targeted for such vicious lies knows, the damage to one's reputation is usually irreparable. Though the charges are false, the resulting stigma is nearly impossible to remove. Fahey's filthy lies sicken me, down to my very soul.

I have never in my life had to deal with such a vicious lunatic, publicly promoting the most damaging of lies about the most sensitive of issues in my personal life . Normally, I would consider my private life --and certainly any "sex life" I might have (in this case, the lack thereof) --off limits for public commentary. Who wouldn't? Very simply, it's nobody's business.

But given the extremity of this situation, and the vile lies being disseminated by Todd Fahey, which appear to have no end in sight, I am forced to defend myself in the only way I know how. And that is to address the issue and to refute Fahey's lies with the facts.

To expose Fahey (once again) for what he is: a malicious psychopath; a misogynist; a provocateur and a pathological liar with an axe to grind. It's a tiresome and exhausting task, but in this case, absolutely necessary. And since Fahey has left me no other option, I'm going for the jugular.

FAHEY'S OBSESSION, DELUSIONS, MISOGYNY, PSYCHOPATHOLOGY

As I have stated before, for the record: As a Christian, I do not engage in sex outside of marriage. I do not make judgments on the personal lives of others; that is not my prerogative nor my concern. However, for me it is a very important issue, a moral code I live by.

Being falsely accused of something I have not done, which is antithetical to everything I believe in, especially by someone whom I had not wronged in any way, is extremely distressing and traumatic to me.

But Fahey need not concern himself with my distress or trauma. It's the fact that his lies have enraged me that he needs to worry about --at least he would, were he not deluded into believing he's going to escape unscathed from the consequences of his malice and dishonesty.

Even before I became a firsthand witness to the severe psychopathology and morally repugnant behavior displayed by Fahey, I had never considered him as anything more than a friend, someone with whom I believed I had common interests and goals. I certainly did not view him as a potential "boyfriend" when I first offered him sanctuary at my home; nor had I indicated any such interest in my prior communications to him.

Unlike some women, who seem to view any man who crosses their path as a prospective romantic interest (even those they have not met in person) I simply do not think along those lines where men are concerned and never have. 

Throughout my life, most of my friendships and professional associations have been with men. These were platonic relationships, not romantic, not sexual. I may love my friends, in the Christian sense of "agape" but I draw a hard line between friendship and any romantic/sexual relationship.

By my way of thinking, a sexual relationship is reserved for one man and one man only: a husband, whom I believe can only be chosen for me and sent by God. That is my belief, my choice and my prerogative, and what anyone else thinks is not my concern, though some people have made fun of me for being "hopelessly idealistic" or "old-fashioned". Maybe I am, but again, that's my business.

Fahey himself berated me for being a "puritan" when I explained to him this moral code by which I live. But if in fact anyone "sent" Todd Fahey, it could only have been the devil! And as God is my witness, the lying lunatic from Hell, Todd Fahey, certainly wasn't a man I could ever fall in love with, much less consider as a potential husband. The very idea makes my skin crawl.

In e-mail correspondence, before I met him in person, Fahey had suggested that he and I could collaborate on some professional projects, as journalists, which would bring in some money, an idea I was interested in due to my own financial destitution and lack of income.

But apparently, like many sleazy predators who roam the Internet, Fahey had some other sub rosa agenda in mind, even before he arrived, as I discovered when he began to make aggressive romantic/sexual overtures to me, when he had only met me a few days before!

No such "professional" projects ever materialized; nor did Fahey show even the slightest interest in such things. When I questioned him about this, he admitted to me that this other idea --a "romantic" and sexual relationship-- had been foremost in his mind, considering that he knew I was "a single woman".

As if any "single woman" would be fair game for his advances! This, despite the fact that I had made it clear to him --even before meeting him-- that I lead a celibate life, due to my Christian beliefs.

Frankly, I can't imagine what Fahey's idea of "romance" would be, though it's clear it certainly has nothing in common with mine. The very thought of being "romanced" by a character such as Fahey is repellent. And the last thing I was interested in, as I told Fahey more than once, was some sort of half-baked, meaningless sexual relationship --exactly what Fahey later concocted lies about, even going so far as to claim that these non-events of "sex" happened as a result of being "smashed"!

Fahey was certainly "smashed", no doubt about it, every single night during his stay at my home. And hung over every single day. But that was his province, not mine, as was his interest in a sexual relationship.

DOES FAHEY HAVE A MOTHER COMPLEX?

I found Fahey's behavior inappropriate, to say the least, for a number of reasons and not just because he knew of my moral standards beforehand. I may be considered old-fashioned, but to me, making such advances to a woman you barely know is unacceptable. For another thing, there is a generation gap: I am nearly old enough to be his mother. (Thank the Lord, I am not!)

In fact, Fahey had a phone conversation with his mother (who is only a few years older than I) in which I heard him repeatedly assure his mother that he was "not shacking up with Barbara Hartwell"; saying "Don't worry, she is not my girlfriend", but "just a friend" and similar disclaimers.

These statements, made to his mother, were about the ONLY truthful statements I ever heard Fahey make about the actual nature of his relationship to me.

At the time, I thought it odd that he would feel the need to reassure his mother about his purported "honorable" intent towards me. His claim that his interest in me did not go beyond friendship and a professional association was also clearly an attempt to deceive his mother.

Thinking back on it, I realized that Fahey must have had a checkered history involving women, possibly even a disastrous one, which, like his alcoholism and drug abuse, probably caused considerable distress for his family. Otherwise, why mention such a thing at all? Being a grown man, thirty-some-odd years of age, why did he consider it his mother's business what the nature of his relationships were?

In fact, he told me of one such incident, while he was in college, in which he threatened suicide unless his parents were willing to allow him to come home and live with them, after his "Japanese girlfriend" broke off the relationship with him. Of course, this too could have been a fabrication...with Fahey, there's no way to tell.

Here's another thing: On the day I first met Fahey in person (June 14, 2004) from the moment I first set eyes on him when I picked him up at the train station, it actually occurred to me that he might be a homosexual, judging from his somewhat effeminate mannerisms and his whiny, nasal speech.

He is certainly anything BUT the "macho man" he portrays himself to be in his writings. But then, as I quickly learned, Fahey is not at all as he portrays himself in his affected public persona, and is actually delusional, in more ways than one.

In any case, since my interest in Todd Fahey had never been anything other than as a friend and colleague, I would not have cared one way or another what his sexual orientation was. I've had a number of homosexual male friends over the course of my life and the issue simply did not concern me. At least, not until I realized he had a fixation on me. Or more like a very unhealthy obsession.

I found myself having to explain repeatedly to Fahey that I was not interested in any such romantic/sexual relationship with him. Because I was unfortunately a somewhat "captive audience" and could not just leave the premises of my own home; because (at least in the beginning) I was still trying to give him the benefit of the doubt and considered him a friend; and because I knew he had been traumatized and was suffering from serious injuries, including head injuries; I took pains to explain to him in detail, the reasons why I was not interested, which I would not otherwise have done in such a situation.

Suffice it to say I was not unkind to him and I had the patience of a saint. Normally, had a man made such unwanted overtures to me, my response would be: "Not interested, thanks but no thanks." Case closed.

Todd Fahey was so drunk most of the time (in addition to popping Prozac, which he said he took twice a day for his "depression"; Valium, for his "panic attacks" and other drugs I'd never heard of) I wonder if he was even able to process this information, or if he heard a word I had said. From the obnoxious and self-absorbed way he behaved, it seemed likely he had not.

Fahey was also so busy talking about himself, non-stop, boasting of his feats of derring-do (theft and blackmail, mostly) in the International Spy World; his drug-induced fantasies of "psychedelic spirituality" in which he claimed "God" had told him he was a "Holy Man"; dropping names of "celebrities" he had hobnobbed with; or whining like a petulant child about his trials and tribulations, that he actually seemed to believe the world revolved around HIMSELF, THE AWESOME TODD BRENDAN FAHEY!

Apparently, he believed that anyone else was just a bit player on the stage of his life, a silent presence in the wings, while he stood Center Stage, under a perpetual spotlight. Despite his obvious fixation, I'm sure this also applied to me. Judging from his bizarre behavior, I don't think he even saw me as a real person; but rather as a convenient "hook" on which to hang his romantic and sexual fantasies.

As one commentator put it, in a thread of messages focused on Fahey's lies, libel and boasting of his non-existent sexual conquests, in Liberty Forum: "He thinks he's Todd Brendan Fahey Christ Superstar!..."

Perhaps needless to say, after having the misfortune of meeting him in person, I for one was not impressed by the self-promoting Fahey; except unfavorably so, by his narcissism and obvious delusions of grandeur. But then, "grandiosity" is typical of most degenerate alcoholics, in which category Todd Fahey fits hand-in-glove.

I don't think anyone who had the misfortune to spend more than a quarter hour in his company could ever accuse him of having the charisma he affects from behind his computer keyboard. "Zero charisma" was my assessment, along with every member of my family who met him, all of whom considered him an ill-mannered boor, droning on about himself as if there were no one else in the room.

A BIZARRE CASE OF MISTAKEN IDENTITY

On several occasions, after getting totally smashed on booze and pills, Fahey became incoherent; his speech was slurred and incomprehensible. At certain of these times he did not recognize me and called me "Iris", which I learned was the name of one of his married students, with whom he had been carrying on an adulterous affair in South Korea.

I thought this odd, to say the least. Since I am a fair-skinned blonde with hazel eyes and angular bone structure; and since this "Iris" is a swarthy, moon-faced, broad-featured Asian with black hair and eyes; also about half a foot shorter than myself....I cannot imagine how he could have mistaken me for this woman. No two women could possibly be such polar opposites in appearance.
 
And then there's the fact that I speak the King's English, with perfect grammar. My parents, both with advanced academic degrees in English, taught me well. I don't need English lessons, especially from the likes of the drunken "professor", Todd Brendan Fahey.

The only explanation I can think of for this case of mistaken identity is that Fahey must have been so stupefied by drink and drugs, that believing me to be "Iris" meant he literally could not see straight! Or for that matter, hear straight. Or possibly, he was living inside his head, in his own little delusional fantasy world and rarely saw or heard anyone outside of it at all. Perhaps an unfortunate combination of all of the above. But believe me, I'm no "Iris"; nor was I an easy mark for Todd Fahey's sexual advances.

Actually, I saw a picture of this former "girlfriend" (she, sitting on Fahey's lap and holding hands) which Fahey posted on the same site, Liberty Forum, last July, only a few days after he was hauled away from my home by the police. (He must have been posting his bizarre concoctions from the mental ward.)

Accompanying the photograph was more of Fahey's usual bragging: That THIS woman (Iris) was his "type", and NOT Barbara Hartwell. Okay, I thought, fine by me, what a relief to know!...maybe he'll now stop obsessing on me; lying to the world about "having sex" with me and leave me alone. Unfortunately for me, no such luck.

Here's what I don't understand: If this woman, Iris, is in fact his "type" as he insists; and since he went to the trouble to boast of this factoid to the world by posting her picture on a public message board, why would he come halfway across the world, only to start making protestations of "love" and "romance"... and his unwelcome sexual advances, to me?

Something he had later admitted to me he had in mind, even before leaving Southeast Asia. Why would he be so persistent in this offensive behavior, directed at a woman who is not his "type"?

But more importantly, why is Fahey lying about having a sexual relationship with me --and worse--boasting of this fabricated sexual conquest all over the Internet? Who does he think would really care what his "type" is? Who would be so interested? What is he trying to prove?

Maybe he's just trying desperately to convince himself that his sexual fantasies with an object of his obsession are "real". Who knows...What a frickin' nutcase!
But anyway, as I finally explained to Fahey, in exasperation, after being subjected to his repeated, drunken sexual advances and his lines of bull (which included his idolizing my "beauty"--strange, since I'm not his "type) about "love" and "romance":

Even if I were someone who believed in unmarried sex (which I do not) I would never have chosen a man whose moral values allowed sleazy affairs with "bar girls" (prostitutes) and married women; and who seemed to think it was just fine and dandy to be making his ill-advised sexual overtures to one woman (me) while boring that woman almost to tears (believe me, it was brutal) droning on and on and on....with his stories of his illicit affairs with these bimbos and whores.

Suffice it to say that Fahey, totally lacking in any discretion or class, held no such appeal for me. Also consider that a vast understatement.

It is clear to me that the morally-challenged and sociopathic Fahey could not deal with this sort of rejection. Nor with my lack of tolerance (make that ZERO tolerance) for his other disrespectful, destructive and intrusive behavior; which was fueled and exacerbated by his drug abuse and drinking binges.

Apparently, attempting to ruin my personal reputation and paint me as a "whore" was his revenge for that rejection; and for finally calling the police to remove him from my home, when he refused to "leave peaceably" of his own volition. But after all, it wasn't my fault. He brought it on himself. No reasonable, self-respecting person, male or female, would have tolerated his maniacal behavior.

FAHEY'S NEGATIVE SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECIES

I also thought it odd that Fahey had a repertoire of three stock answers to any comments I made which he perceived as being critical of himself:

1) "Well, I'm not stupid. Duh."

2) "Well, if you don't like me..."

3) "Well, if you want to throw me out of here, go ahead."

These comments, in precisely these words, were repeated over and over, like a broken record, even when having no connection with the subject matter of the conversation; even when not the slightest "criticism" of him was intended; and even when I was speaking about an idea in general terms, which had nothing to do with him.

What became very clear to me was that Fahey interpreted almost everything --even the most innocent comments-- as a personal affront. That Fahey was used to being "thrown out" of places and seemed to expect it, like it would only be a matter of time...

And I have to wonder who could possibly "like" the disrespectful, intrusive, self-centered and sociopathic behavior exhibited by Fahey? As for being "stupid" in his perpetually drunken fog, I can't argue against that one either.

It seems Fahey was chock-full of negative self-fulfilling prophecies. How does he expect to be treated by others, when he behaves like such a complete --forgive the word, but there is no other which could possibly describe him--asshole?

PSYCHOPATHOLOGY OF MISOGYNY

From listening to his sordid tales of "bar girls" and adultery, it seems Fahey is the type who considers all women to be "whores", just there for the taking, and at his convenience. Wrong, wrong and wrong again.

In my opinion, Fahey needs to get clean and sober; rid himself of those delusions (and those demons) and maybe, just maybe, he'll wake up to reality. Maybe then he'd see himself for what he is: a misogynist and an opportunist; perhaps even a latent homosexual (or for all I know, a closet homosexual) --and develop some healthy respect for women.

But be that as it may, whatever the nature of Fahey's psychopathology, I'm certainly not going to allow him to get away with denigrating me and defaming my good name, in an attempt to salvage his wounded pride and to promote his sick fantasies.

As a woman, I may be many things that many people (including the misogynistic Fahey) don't like. When crossed, it's true that I may be a bitch on wheels. Or as one friend of mine put it, "Meaner than a junkyard dog." But a "whore" is most certainly not one of those things.

Fahey's malicious lies, put forth in the form of absolutely pornographic filth, have now been disseminated far and wide all over the World Wide Web. Fahey claims to own nine (9) websites and seems to be a ubiquitous presence on many others.

PRIVACY VIOLATIONS, TAMPERING AND FORGERY

In addition to his libelous raving about his non-existent (at least involving me) sexual conquests, Fahey published private e-mail written to him in confidence, some of which he tampered with, "forging" by adding (fabricating) comments never written by me; or "editing" out comments for the obvious purpose of misrepresenting me.

Such tampering is easy to do, you only need to know how to edit e-mail text in a word processing program. The "time stamps" --which Fahey has often boasted of, to "prove" he was the FIRST to publish his "scoops"-- or the e-mail addresses of a purported "sender" can be cut and pasted by even the least knowledgable on computers.

And Fahey boasted of being a "computer genius". I don't know if that's true, but no doubt, this cut-and-paste forgery and unauthorized editing of material is a regular practice for Fahey. Why the hell not? He has no scruples and will do anything to promote himself...or the lies du jour which will suit his unconscionable objectives.

As for the actual content of those messages, I make it a policy never to send anything by e-mail which I consider too "sensitive" to put in writing, whether I find the recipient trustworthy or not. I learned this the hard way, after having too many unconscionable people violate my privacy and betray my confidence.
And unlike the publicity-hungry and undiscriminating Fahey, I don't make my personal life an open book. It's nobody's business. Neither do I violate the confidence of others, much less fabricate lies about their personal lives and then publish these lies on the World Wide Web.

I wouldn't do that to my worst enemies. True, I might rip their throats out, but only if they deserve it. Unlike cowards and liars of Fahey's ilk, I prefer good clean violence to settle the score. Metaphorically speaking, of course.

I've only seen a few of these bogus postings by Fahey and don't intend to waste my time searching out or reading the others, which I must assume are making the rounds out there in cyberspace. I can only conclude that he has also tampered with and used these private e-mails for the purpose of misrepresenting me and demonizing me. Since he has already concocted the worst lies imaginable, I would put no act of deceit, sabotage or iniquity past him.

The fact that he has violated my privacy by posting personal communications AT ALL is dishonorable, unconscionable and unjustifiable; and clearly shows his total lack of integrity, by any standards, journalistic or otherwise. Nobody could accuse Todd Fahey of journalistic integrity!

As part of his campaign to discredit me, and to demonize me, he also posted "articles" with the byline, Barbara Hartwell --which I did not write; with titles I did not compose; and which were not submitted by me to any of his online publications.

FAHEY'S HATRED OF JESUS CHRIST AND ALL THINGS CHRISTIAN

In fact, I well remember that in the past, when Fahey used to publish some of my articles on his website, Friends of Liberty, he had often edited my work --without my permission-- before posting these articles. And tellingly, he always, always REMOVED any comments about Jesus Christ or God. He said it made me seem "too religious". Figure that one out.

It has also come back to me through the grapevine that Fahey has been obsessively writing libelous personal communications to anyone he thinks will listen (he once boasted of having an e-mail address book a quarter mile long...another lie I'm sure, but still, he probably has quite a few people on his list) filled with his malicious lies.

One such target for these messages was my friend and colleague Geral Sosbee, who had admonished Fahey more than once for his unconscionable and despicable treatment of me; and for his libelous and false claims of a sexual relationship which never existed, except perhaps in Fahey's delusional fantasies.

The devil only knows (or maybe the demons that possess him) what else Fahey has said and done in his obsessive one-man crusade to destroy me; I've seen but a fraction of the writings and postings of this lunatic.

As far as why he is obsessed with me, it's anyone's guess. After all, according to Fahey, I'm not even his "type". Why me, Lord?

A LIE DETECTOR TEST? CUSTOM MADE FOR A PATHOLOGICAL LIAR

One of Fahey's many boasts in his attacks against me was that he wanted to take "a lie detector test" to "prove" he was "telling the truth about having sex with Barbara Hartwell". Does he actually believe the foremost concern in everyone's mind is Todd Fahey's sex life? Who could possibly give a damn who he did --or in this case did not-- have sex with?

Speaking strictly for myself, my "sex life" (assuming I had one) would be none of anybody's damn business. I certainly would not make it the subject of reports (libelous or otherwise) on the Internet, nor the fodder for lie detector tests.
Evidently, the oh-so-delusional Fahey fancies himself an Internet Celebrity...or some sort of Hot Shot Folk Hero.. (The Celebrated Author of "Wisdom's Maw "!)

Maybe this fool believes Inquiring Minds Want To Know...but as far as polygraph tests go, it seems Fahey has been out of the loop for a long, long time (if he was ever in it to begin with, which is doubtful.)

Fahey might be interested to learn that pathological liars, schizophrenics, those impaired with multiple personality disorder and delusional psychopaths can easily pass a polygraph test, with flying colors, and often do --all the while lying to beat the band.

Or perhaps, there is a method to his madness and Fahey takes solace in this point of fact, one he is already aware of, smugly knowing that he himself could "pass".

As a matter of fact, intelligence operatives are routinely trained to beat the polygraph, as a failsafe against revealing classified information to the opposition, under hostile interrogation, using bio-feedback techniques. I know this because I was trained that way by CIA myself. But so what?

Polygraphs are not considered reliable and in fact, the results are not admitted in any court of law. So much for Fahey's grand "lie detector" ploy...
Fahey, from what I've observed, is nothing but a Walking-Talking-Drunkenly-Slurring-Lie-Incarnate...So what is he really trying to prove?

He's proven one thing to me (and at least a few others who witnessed his lunacy firsthand) beyond a shadow of a doubt...that he's not only a pathological liar, but a flaming whackjob! He certainly wouldn't need the polygraph to establish the truth of that one.

EXPLOITING THE DEATH OF A BELOVED PET FOR SELF-PROMOTION

But believe it or not, there's more. Sociopathic behavior which exemplifies Fahey's total lack of moral integrity. About a week after Fahey blew into Southern Maine, like an ill wind, my beloved cat Hercules became deathly ill after ingesting some antifreeze while roaming the neighborhood.

While Fahey reclined on my living room couch, "recovering" from his "life-threatening" injuries, listening to the stereo and drinking himself into a stupor (consuming two full bottles of red wine in one sitting) a kind neighbor drove me to the emergency veterinary clinic in Portland, where I waited for several hours in the middle of the night for Hercules to be examined.

I had to leave him overnight for tests and was informed the next morning by phone that the tests had shown he had been poisoned and that he would have to be euthanized, as nothing could be done to save his life.

I can't be sure if he was deliberately poisoned, and if so, by whom; such things have happened, at least in my life, and have been done for the purpose of creating more traumatic stress, to add to my already heavy load. Certainly having to deal with Todd Fahey and his lunacy on a daily basis had created extreme traumatic stress, even before the episode with my cat being poisoned.

When I got this phone call from the veterinary clinic, I was shattered and heartbroken and burst into tears, something I rarely do, even under the most traumatic of circumstances. But losing Hercules? He was my sweetheart, my treasure, my precious feline child, I loved him with all my heart.

When the call came in, Fahey was sitting at the computer in my small office, having commandeered it, as usual, for his self-serving purposes. His comment upon hearing the news of Hercules's death?

"Well, look at it this way: now you'll have one less animal to take care of."
Then, Fahey's observation later that day, that it was a "damn shame" I would have to spend a total of $700.00 (the last money I had) on the veterinary bills...just for a "dead cat", as he also opined in one of his self-absorbed "progress reports" posted on Friends of Liberty --in which he described for his "fan club" the latest details of his "recovery" at Barbara Hartwell's house.

The so-called "dead cat" (my Hercules, a beautiful tiger-stripe with sea-green eyes and the loudest purr in the known universe) was just a flippant aside, nothing more, in Fahey's complaint that there would now be no more money (mine, naturally) to pay for daily living expenses. (Read: his large supply of red wine.)

Imagine a person so self-centered; so callous; so utterly lacking in sympathy and concern for the feelings of others; so devoid of common decency, that he would exploit the death of one of my beloved cats, as just another opportunity to promote himself...

But he didn't stop there. No, indeed. He later, after leaving my home, in the thick of his libel campaign, exploited my heartbreak over Hercules to fabricate more lies about "sexual encounters" which never happened, ON THE NIGHT OF MY CAT'S DEATH, during which I actually spent the night mourning my lost cat.

Fahey, sitting (or more accurately, slumping) smugly in a comfortable chair in my living room --in his usual drunken stupor-- holding forth in his usual whining voice about his many tragic "problems", was the last thing on my mind. But naturally, I was berated by Fahey (as often happened) for "not listening" to him and leaving him downstairs by himself when, exhausted and grief-stricken, I went upstairs to try to get some sleep.

And FYI for the clueless and heathen-materialist, Todd Fahey: No amount of money would have been "too much" to spend in an attempt to save my cat's life. I'd have spent twice that amount, three or four times that amount, if necessary and would have sacrificed anything if it meant my cat's life could have been saved.

Fahey's is the attitude of a narcissist and worse, a sociopath. Nobody matters but himself. Everyone else be damned. What a scumbag.

EXTREME VIOLATIONS OF PRIVACY AND SECURITY

As if exploiting the death of my beloved cat were not enough, another of Fahey's vindictive acts was posting, all over the World Wide Web, my private, unlisted phone number, which shortly thereafter had to be disconnected, due to more harassing calls from Fahey and his fellow provocateurs --as well as curiosity-seekers from a dive bar, The Whaler, where Fahey had told his slanderous tales of woe about me and my family-- to whom he gleefully handed out the number.
 
He even published the street address of my home, encouraging other like-minded stalkers and nutcases to harass me as well, thus further violating my privacy; compromising my security and endangering my safety.

What did Fahey care? He'd been removed by the police for drunk and disorderly conduct and could no longer use me to provide a "safe house". Why not try his damnedest to make my own home unsafe for me?

This malicious pathological liar has done more damage than any provocateur I've ever been targeted by, or had the displeasure of knowing, excepting none --and considering some of what I've been through, that's quite an accomplishment!

VANITY, THY NAME IS FAHEY

I'm sure Todd Fahey takes great pride in a Job Well Done, just as he had boasted to me of other targets he had stolen from; blackmailed; or told his vicious lies about.

Yes, he admitted to fabricating lies whenever it suited his purposes. For Fahey, "bragging rights" are second nature, even when concerning behavior most people would consider shameful. He'll boast of anything --anything at all-- true or untrue, as long as it gets his name in print and satisfies his pathological craving for attention.

And although the other slimy characters such as Tim White and Brenda Negri, working together as a tag-team of COINTELPRO lackeys, have for years been libeling me by calling me a "whore" or "slut" (including accusing me of being "George Bush's trollop"); and fabricating other outrageous lies for the purpose of character assassination, Fahey is the first of these sleazy provocateurs ever to make such false claims about me, involving HIMSELF as a false witness.

If he'd been a woman, I imagine he'd be just the type of gal to cook up a story of "rape", fabricating such a tale after being rejected by the object of a fixation.
What a truly sick, pathetic, poor-excuse-for-a-man. If there had been anything he could use to blackmail me, I've no doubt whatsoever he would have tried. For Fahey, blackmail seems to be a standard M.O. But I am not the type to allow myself to be blackmailed, and more importantly, have no such "blackmailable" skeletons in my closet.

But that didn't stop Todd Fahey. Why worry about a lack of ammunition for blackmail? Fahey just went right ahead and fabricated the most vile lies he could think of. Then publicized them all over the World Wide Web.

OBSCENITY FOR THE CHEAP THRILL SEEKERS: IT SELLS!

To this day, I have not visited Fahey's website, Friends of Liberty (which name certainly does not reflect the contents; Friends of Obscenity is a far more accurate description) since shortly after he began posting his many lies and smears, bearing false witness against me, in July 2004.

When I saw the totally obscene titles of some of Fahey's "articles" (using the "F" word along with my name, IN THE TITLE); links sent to me by concerned friends, I refused to read even one of them. Nor would I read any more of what was by now his ever-proliferating sewage. I just hit the DELETE button to every such link, simply because reading such filth would have served no purpose except to send me into a rage and create further traumatic stress for me.

Given the fact I have a serious heart condition, exacerbated by any kind of stress, this is no small problem. Since I also suffer from PTSD, I avoid any kind of traumatic stress when and where I can.

But then, I'm sure that was Fahey's intent: to spare no effort to inflict as much damage as possible. He is after all, a provocateur (at times using the screen name, "Agent Provocateur") one whose diabolical impunity knows no bounds. Fahey's many provocations, his baiting, taunting and outrageous lies, have proven that in spades.

I refuse to waste my time slogging through his filthy libelous posts, replete with his many lies and refuting each and every one. I haven't read most of Fahey's hog swill and don't intend to. He's just another of the "time wasters" I have commented on elsewhere; albeit one of the most vicious provocateurs I have encountered anywhere. The same goes for his fellow provocateurs, his new comrades-in-arms, other "Friends of Liberty" who jumped on the bandwagon to further harass me.

Instead of reading his filthy libelous reports myself, I had some friends retrieve them to save for evidence against him for a lawsuit I will eventually file. And from what they've told me (sparing me the filthy details, at my request) the content of these "reports" is so appalling --and so damaging-- in the lies fabricated by Fahey, that he has dug his own grave with the evidence of libel and defamation which he has provided against himself.

Can I prove damages? Damn straight I can. I've got police reports; testimony of witnesses, including hospital personnel and much, much more. Fahey's only possible "defense" would be insanity. And not of the "temporary" variety. Let him tell it to the judge.

But the damages instigated by Fahey didn't stop there. As I heard from friends and family (some of whom witnessed Fahey's lunatic behavior firsthand) these filthy lies were seized upon by others among my enemies such as provocateurs Brenda Negri and Tim White (both also sexual perverts: Negri is a sexual predator/law-enforcement groupie who stalks men she reads about on the Internet; and White is a transvestite and collector of child pornography, a stooge for Division 5 of the Denver FBI) and posted in any and all newsgroups or websites which would allow such gutter trash.

Thus Fahey will be held accountable for spawning even more filth, parroted by the many other morons, sleazebags and cyber-junkies who derive cheap thrills from reading about --and of course contributing their own libelous pornographic comments and speculations-- the Lifestyles of the Drunk and Degenerate, such as Todd Brendan Fahey.

Most of these creeps, being abject cowards, hide behind idiotic screen names and I can't be bothered tracking them all down. To have my name attached to such filthy lies by these sleazy provocateurs is insufferable.

But here's a message for any of them who may be reading this: You people are sub-human. You are no better than maggots. And I promise I will make it my business to see that your acts of iniquity will come back to haunt you, one way or another, just as they will for Fahey.

This also applies to any other individual, named or unnamed, who took part in disseminating these libelous falsehoods in any way, shape or form. Anyone who was involved.

Considering appropriate retribution for such crimes puts me in mind of the "avenging angel" Denzel Washington in the film, Man on Fire. Make of that what you will.

"FREEDOM OF SPEECH" EMBRACES PORNOGRAPHIC LIBEL?

Since Fahey's lies centered on their long-time target, Barbara Hartwell, his cohorts, Brenda Negri and Tim White, must have been ecstatic to join Fahey's splendid new libel campaign. What a wonderful opportunity !...Birds of a feather flock together. So do pathological liars, delusional whackjobs and provocateurs.

Apparently, Fahey has now been banned from certain websites on which he had longstanding posting privileges, including the aforementioned Liberty Forum, because his outrageous obscenities and libel went over the deep end, even where "free speech" could not be invoked to justify the filth he was spewing out. Fahey then blamed the "censorship" of his filthy lies on the "spooks" whom he claimed had taken over the forum. Todd Fahey: Paranoid and delusional, as always.

FRIENDS OF LIBERTY?

Other websites couldn't have cared less. During the same time period of his filthy libelous rampage against Barbara Hartwell, even after his insanity was clearly exposed by such actions, Fahey was still posting --in good standing-- on many other sites, including Rumor Mill News and Breaking All the Rules (BATR).

Which came as no surprise to me; but it certainly shows the type of character these sites approve of and endorse; and the type of material they consider "newsworthy". Fahey would do well to submit his "news items" to The National Enquirer, or better yet, Hustler magazine, where his fabricated smut and level of intellect would be truly appreciated by the subscribers.

WHO IS TODD BRENDAN FAHEY...REALLY?

I have already refuted Fahey's earliest lies and delusional fabrications in my two comprehensive reports on Todd Brendan Fahey of July 2004. If you want the truth and are interested in the facts; the testimony of credible, reliable witnesses, including the police officers who removed Fahey from my home and later dropped him off at the psychiatric ward; a detective who investigated Fahey's criminal harassment; and even Fahey's own parents, who are clearly appalled and in consternation at the horrid behavior of their son, read the reports, posted on my website.

If by chance you mistakenly thought Todd Fahey was one of the "good guys", or as he has repeatedly boasted in his self-aggrandizing political pieces, one of the "white hats"...assuming this report has not been enough to convict him...you will be amazed.

A tip for single (and married) women, of all ages and all ethnic backgrounds, around the world: You don't want to meet Todd Fahey...unless you enjoy sexual harassment and being stalked by a slobbering drunk; or unless you happen to be the notorious provocateur and pervert, Brenda Negri. No doubt, these two were made for each other.

As far as I and many others can see, despite the massive damages he has done to me (which I intend to hold him accountable for by any and every legal means possible) Fahey's primary accomplishment by this rampage of libelous filth was to expose HIMSELF as an obsessive-compulsive psychopath; a pervert and a pathological liar.

He also exposed the fact that he was so obsessed with a woman (Barbara Hartwell) who not only rejected his sexual advances; but finally, in profound disgust, threw him out of her house with a police escort; that he made a mission of destroying her personal and professional reputation. I can only guess that Hell hath no fury like a madman scorned....

DELUSIONS GALORE: ADVENTURES OF THE PSYCHEDELIC SPY!

Last I heard, the bedraggled and slovenly little coward (he is nowhere NEAR "just over 6 feet tall", as he boasts in his affected macho-man descriptions of himself) had run back to his hideout in South Korea, where presumably he'll return to his usual pursuits: Blackmailing school officials. Theft of documents and sundry other items (anything that's smaller than a breadbox and not nailed down). Destruction of private property, including university computers.

And last but not least, fueling his negatively-inflated ego and indulging his delusions of grandeur and paranoid fantasies with his political vanity pieces, featuring (drum roll, please...) HIMSELF, TODD BRENDAN FAHEY! as the Double-oh-seven-style protagonist. What a guy!

I can just see him now...weaving, staggering and stumbling his way across a dimly-lit cocktail lounge, making his oh-so-suave approach to his ideal paragon of womanhood, a coarse-looking, skanky Asian bar whore.

I can almost hear him, as he clears his throat and lowers his inflection, in what would be a futile attempt to mask the faggy nasal whine. In his best James Bond imitation, he would look soulfully at the whore with his bleary, maniacal glare and intone: "Fahey. Todd Fahey."

The fact that he'd have to pay for the "date" would probably come as quite a shock, when sometime later he was herded out the door, as the beginnings of one of his "blistering hangovers" took hold.

But despite his delusions of grandeur and overblown ego, he's no James Bond. Not by a long shot.

Drinking himself into a stupor all the livelong night, every night; getting hopped up on the plentiful supply of over-the-counter drugs so readily available in Southeast Asia; and provoking anybody who crosses his path into a knock-down-drag-out brawl, in which Fahey seems to always come out on the losing end and get his ass kicked. (It seems he has a death wish, one that if he continues with his passive-aggressive provocations, somebody may eventually grant.)

Also unluckily for Fahey, he has no combat, martial arts or firearms training, something he actually admitted to me in one of his rare sober moments. It was one of the few things he told me which was actually believable.

He doesn't even have a driver's license! Can't be Bond without a fancy set of wheels...

Nor, from what I could see, despite his boasts of alleged "CIA and DIA training" could he be anything but a serious, serious liability to any intelligence operation foolish enough to hire him.

CIA training?.... Have another drink, Fahey, one for the road, and tell us all another tall tale.

Fahey actually considers John K. Singlaub, of the World Anti Communist League --a notorious NWO/CIA front (at least to those in-the-know) and nefarious mind control handler for operations Phoenix and Gladio, one of the "good guys", as he told me himself. I soon gave up trying to disabuse him of this idiotic notion, as well as others he had clearly been hoodwinked --or more likely, mind-controlled-- into believing.

I even showed him a videotape (one of only a few copies in existence, since it was "banned" in the U.S.); a documentary about Operation Gladio. Fahey's hero, the "Great General Singlaub" (as journalist Virginia McCollough, another "Friend of Liberty" and malicious antagonist who targeted me for libel, calls him) featured prominently, speaking of his role in Operation Gladio.

Gladio involved military-style assassinations of innocent civilians, non-combatants (many of whom were women and children) by mind-controlled "hit squads". State-sponsored terrorism. General John K. Singlaub: Another "Friend of Liberty".

In case anyone is wondering how I know so much about this operation, it is because I have personally profiled and debriefed quite a number of the operatives and Manchurian Candidates who were utilized in the hit squads as assassins in both Phoenix and Gladio. I have not yet exposed a fraction of what I know about these deep black operations, as it's kind of risky (actually, very risky) and at present, I can't afford a bodyguard.

But since Fahey had known Singlaub, I thought he'd be interested in the information I had, as well as the documentary on Op Gladio. But alas, Fahey couldn't keep his attention on the videotape. For one thing, he was too drunk .
But more to the point, the subject of the documentary wasn't the Superstar, Todd Brendan Fahey. He kept interrupting the video with irrelevant comments and non sequiturs --naturally, talking about himself. After the first tape was over, he said he wasn't in the mood to watch the second part.

Fahey --ever the Drama Queen-- announced last spring, on several websites, having been a "spy" for Singlaub and his CIA/DIA black ops political cronies, when he was just a young twerp at university, the Big Fish in a small pond --President of the student branch of the John Birch Society. He's played that one for all it was worth, for years, which didn't turn out to be much.

Another of his widely-touted "credentials" has been "Strategic Writer" for former CIA operative Ted Humes. What the uninitiated don't know won't hurt them: A "strategic writer" is simply a lackey who promotes the lies fed to him by a cabal like CIA; and/or places the preferred "spin" on the subject matter. In other words, a propagandist. A Liar-for-Hire. Perfect job for Todd Brendan Fahey.

Just as Fahey boasted of having been the "Strategic Director" on various websites, including Ether Zone and Jeff Rense. What happened to Fahey's (self-created) lofty titles? Why have these sites now disowned him?

The Psychedelic Spy! (as he calls himself.) Ponder on that one...

More like a low-level reject from the MK Ultra program, who was shelved when he couldn't make the grade as any kind of spy, much less a top-notch NOC. Suffice it to say that nobody at The Farm in Virginia ever heard of Todd Fahey.
 
But those are the breaks, and that's how they operate. There's no substitute for talent. In the world of spooks and black operations, talent is the coin of the realm.

Forget the training, Fahey didn't make it that far. And just consider the irreversible brain damage from a few too many of those acid trips. He wouldn't know which way is up, nor even what day it is. From what I've seen, Fahey flunked out with the "Spooks" he so obviously reveres a long, long time ago...and has been trying to make up for lost time ever since.

No. No more travels through Spy World for Todd Brendan Fahey. He will surely settle back in to his own little hog-heaven in the godforsaken backwater of South Korea...consorting with bar whores... committing adultery with married women...engaging in fornication with his students...

And maybe even with the underage child prostitutes of both sexes whom I was horrified to read that he is reputed to seek out. Gee whiz, I guess I have to believe that one, since I read it on the Internet...After all, isn't everything you find in print The Truth?

Even if not, at least it's clear that Fahey hopes that his readers will believe the libelous, obscene and extremely damaging falsehoods he himself promotes about others, including Barbara Hartwell.

But anyway, just like the bonanza of over-the-counter drugs, soliciting child prostitutes is probably not even a criminal offense over there...after all, the savages in Korea barbecue cats and dogs for supper. Life is cheap and nothing is sacred. Who cares...

But whatever the case may be, good riddance to this psychotic scum and his ungodly obsessions. The U.S. of A. is rid of one more con man and false patriot.
And...I must remind him that he was warned not to mess with Barbara Hartwell. He foolishly chose to disregard that warning.

But next time this pathetic loser; this wannabe-spook; this pathological liar and penny-ante provocateur, Todd Brendan Fahey, forms one of his ill-advised fixations on a woman (and I'm sure there will be a next time, there always is with these psychos) perhaps it would behoove him to choose a woman who's not a whole lot smarter than he is. A woman who doesn't have bona fide intelligence training, especially in Psychological Operations...

He'd also be well advised to choose a woman who lacks the killer instinct and won't be quite so ruthless in pursuit of justice, when targeted by a man of dishonor.

Barbara Hartwell
October 22, 2004
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Addendum, January 31, 2005:
 
Although this article was written in October 2004, roughly four months after he was thrown out of my home, here is a little update on the lunatic postings of Todd Brendan Fahey. Just more evidence of Fahey's continued obsession with Barbara Hartwell and the lies he is still fabricating and disseminating. I have no idea what Fahey's "source" is for these latest lies. Probably the demons sitting on his shoulder and whispering in his ear.
 
This post, written by Todd Fahey, is from a site called Liberty Post:

Title: Whereabouts of Barbara Hartwell
Post Date: 2005-01-22 22:46:06 by toddbrendanfahey
301 Comments

Before it's spilt by anyone else here, I might as well do the deed.
 
Barbara Hartwell lost residency in the house that she never owned in Orchard Park, Maine (and which had been lent to her by a member of the John Birch Society, but for which she could never manage to pay).

She lost her Web sites (to non-payment) in July; and has relocated to Brownsville, Texas, to share an apartment with one Geral Sosbee.
That's what I know.

For those interested, here, once again, are the FACTS:

1) I have not "lost residency" in my home, nor have at any time. I have lived here as a full time resident since June 2003.

2) My home (which is located in Ocean Park, Maine, NOT "Orchard Park") belongs to me. It is NOT, nor has ever been, "lent" to me by any "member of the John Birch Society". My home is NOT, nor ever has been, owned by any member of the JBS.

3) There is NOT, nor ever has been, any issue of "managing to pay" anyone for the home where I live. My finances are none of anyone's business, least of all the lying lunatic, Todd Fahey.

4) I had only ONE website, which was taken off-line in August 2004, by my decision. I did NOT "lose" that website in connection to any form of "non-payment".

5) And lastly, I have NOT "relocated to Brownsville, Texas". I do NOT "share an apartment" there with Geral Sosbee. In fact, I have never even visited Geral Sosbee at his home in Brownsville, a fact which can be verified by Mr. Sosbee himself.

So much for what Todd Brendan Fahey "knows"....

But I have no doubt that this lying rat bastard will continue fabricating additional "news-flashes" about Barbara Hartwell, for the foreseeable future, as his drunken, delusional moods inspire him. As always, caveat lector! And more important, consider the source.

Note, added November 29, 2006: Please see Geral Sosbee's website for Geral's public statement, for the record, in corroboration of the fact that Barbara Hartwell has never, at any time, relocated to Brownsville Texas, to "share an apartment with one Geral Sosbee."


Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Riding Herd: Micromanagement by Consensus Vs. Individual Liberty



Note: This report was written in November, 2005. Though it doesn't address current issues, I am reposting it for its value in exposing hypocrites, fools, dupes and "useful idiots" in the "patriot" movement. Call it a character flaw, but I have never "suffered fools gladly."

Loud, self-righteous, nosy, meddling busybodies are definitely NOT my cup of tea. It's no wonder that the older I get, the more reclusive I become. Recently, I saw a bumper sticker that read: The more people I meet, the more I like my cats. Amen and amen!

Earlier this week, I commented briefly on a series of messages in the Revolutionary Coalition forum, which related to several of the members and their efforts to form some sort of "committee" in connection with the coalition. "Committee" was not my word --that was the term used in the messages written by others.

My response (To Hell with the Committee) was due to my observations that these individuals appeared to be engaging in activity which might derail the "one-line platform" of the coalition by a small group whose "consensus" would decide policy or make changes (in the form of micro-management) which might compromise the focus of the coalition.

I based my assessment on reading the messages and analyzing what facts were available to me, as per the testimony of various persons involved.

The second reason I found it necessary to state this opinion was because Rick Stanley, the founder of the Revolutionary Coalition, came under heavy criticism, even attack, by several persons on what I believe are unwarranted grounds, such as "ego", simply because he repeatedly stated that he, as the "steward", intended to keep the coalition on track in its original intent and goal: Uniting various like-minded groups and individuals to form a super third party which would defend God-given rights as protected and guaranteed under the Constitution.

Since I have always agreed with Rick about this one all-important issue (which is why I joined in the first place); and since it appeared that these "committee" types were ganging up on him, attempting to strongarm him into some sort of "rule by consensus" (mob rule, as I saw it) I simply offered some back up in his defense --as well as in defense of the stated purpose of the coalition, which is what I also stand for.

Gerry Donaldson saw fit to respond to me with unwarranted accusations of using the tactics of a "disinformer"; and of "bashing" other members of the forum. I noticed that no one else (including Rick Stanley, whose position was in basic agreement with mine and in fact, if anything, stated in a more vehement manner) was singled out by Donaldson for these accusations.

So I wrote another commentary outlining my position in more personal and specific terms, which in a nutshell, is this: I do not tolerate being admonished or interfered with by aggressive people who overstep their bounds.

This shows a lack of respect for my personal boundaries as an individual and I have every right to confront the offenders. A very simple position, based on solid uncompromising principles and ethics, which I backed up with specific examples, including the behavior displayed by both Gerry Donaldson and another coalition member, Vanessa Davis, on more than one occasion.

Individual rights, as bestowed by God, are the very soul of Liberty. When people who claim to defend the Constitution, which was designed to protect and guarantee these rights, under the Rule of Law; and then show themselves in reality to be would-be micro-managers, riding herd over how those rights will be apportioned to others, then I for one, feel it is imperative to bring this to attention, right out in the open.

I would be remiss if I failed to do this. I've done it before and I'll do it again, whenever the need arises. And the readers, as always, may assess my position statements and make of them what they will.

As an independent activist, investigator and journalist; and as an established whistleblower (ex-CIA) on government corruption, I conduct my own work in the way I see fit, as I have done for many years. I make my own decisions and take full responsibility for my own actions.

I am not required to submit to "consensus" decisions, committees or answer to officious, meddling busybodies and snoops who try to tell me what I "should" or "should not" be doing, saying, writing, publishing, etc.

I would not join any organization with such requirements, as I might as well just kiss my freedom, privacy and autonomy goodbye, join the Neo-Bolshevik party and have done with it!

As a "member" of the Revolutionary Coalition, I am simply ONE individual who agrees with the one-line platform. I am a member, nothing more; nor do I seek to be anything more in connection with this coalition.

I am not (and never will be) a team player, nor have I ever pretended to be something I am not. As I told Rick when he invited me to join, I have reservations about getting involved with ANY group, simply because there are always those who do not respect the personal boundaries of others and who attempt to assert some form of control, manipulation or "authority" over how others conduct their activism; and/or feel the need for "special status" such as being a "director"; a "state representative"; forming a "steering committee"; being named as some type of "official representative" and so on and so forth.

Many groups and organizations adhere to this type of hierarchical structure and I avoid them like the plague for this reason. If I do involve myself with a group effort, I need only to be left in peace to pursue my activism in my own way, with no interference....or I leave, as simple as that. And I've been there, done that, in more organizations than I care to enumerate here.

Which is why it greatly concerned me when I saw the "committee" forming out of what was (and hopefully will continue to be) a simple, no-nonsense hard-core agenda of defending individual liberties and rights, as protected under the U.S. Constitution.

Some people connected to this "committee" expressed concern about the name: Revolutionary Coalition. These folks wanted to change it, so they wouldn't alienate potential recruits.

Wishy-washy weathervanes, people-pleasers and approval seekers. That is NOT what a Revolution is about. A Revolution is conducted by Revolutionaries --hard-core freedom fighters.

Revolutionaries do not seek consensus to make their decisions, nor are they in doubt about how to proceed. Revolutionaries do not need special official status among their brothers and sisters in the cause. Revolutionaries are not political hacks who depend on party-line positions to make their decisions.

Real Revolutionaries take matters into their own hands and make things happen by standing up for their Individual Rights on a daily basis. Their position --defending Liberty--remains consistent and uncompromised over time, no matter how much time it takes; no matter how many times they get knocked down, they stand back up and fight --to the death, if that's what it comes down to.

Revolutionaries do not seek permission to act, nor wait for approval from their presumed "superiors." or "leaders." Revolutionaries become their own leaders. 

Revolutionaries do not compromise, in the cause of Freedom, for any reason.

Revolutionaries do not recognize authority over their lives from anyone save God Almighty, whence their rights issue.

Revolutionaries say: Liberty or Death. Don't Tread on Me. And they mean it with every fiber of their being.

Just because I'm a lone gun by nature and preference does not mean that I am not able and willing to cooperate with others for this common goal: Revolution. It will certainly take a revolution to change things in this country, whether it be by relatively peaceful means or not. Things are simply too far gone for any other solution.

But aside from that specific common goal, that one-line platform: Defending our God-given (natural) Constitutionally protected and guaranteed rights-- I have no interest and no involvement, with any group or organization.

And as for my affiliation with the Revolutionary Coalition, it is just that: an affiliation, one of a number of affiliations with various individuals and entities, all revolving around the same basic issue.

This particular coalition is not my main focus, professionally or personally. It is simply one of a number of endeavors I am involved in, which I believe will further my own agenda: Revolution.

It should go without saying that if I did not believe it were worthy, I would not commit any of my time or effort in connection with it. I should add that Rick Stanley has remained remarkably consistent in sticking to the main issue, this one line platform, which is defending God-given rights, guaranteed and protected under the Constitution.

Unfortunately, certain others have not. They have taken it upon themselves to attempt to steer the direction of a coalition of what is meant to be INDEPENDENT third parties and individuals in such a way that the voice and activism of the INDIVIDUAL in connection with the coalition is censored, monitored, moderated, modified and otherwise generally watered down; thus rendering the coalition a less than dynamic force in its efforts to rid this country of tyranny and return it to the Rule of Law under the United States Constitution.

Two of these individuals, Vanessa Davis and Gerry Donaldson, are owners of group forums in affiliation with the Revolutionary Coalition, RC Chat & News, and Awaken American Christians, respectively.

Now, to Gerry Donaldson's latest response (a message to Vanessa Davis) to a commentary by Barbara Hartwell, in which I outlined some of the attempts of these individuals, to interfere with me personally; and who apparently mistakenly believe it is their prerogative to "ride herd" over the activities of other individuals affiliated with the coalition.

[Gerry Donaldson wrote: Vanessa, FYI. Barbara must have been having a bad time when she mentions "admonishing" her on Awaken American Christians. Actually, she was the one getting attacked and I stepped up and said, "those who bash other members of the forum rather than keeping with the mission of the forum to educate Americans as to their unalienable and Constitutionally guaranteed rights..will be removed from the forum." See what happens when you defend some people? LOL]

Here, I present the ACTUAL postings to which I referred in my commentary; and which refute Gerry Donaldson's contentions and prove my original point: That he admonished me for purported "bashing."

I should add that Gerry Donaldson DELETED one of my posts before he wrote this, which is what started the whole thing. The post in question was about cyber-stalking and criminal harassment by Todd Brendan Fahey, who in collusion with his cohorts, Tim White and Larry Lawson, was posting outrageous lies and character assassination against Barbara Hartwell on various message boards, including this one, Awaken American Christians.

Gerry Donaldson did NOT "defend" me, as per his claim. On the contrary, here is the evidence shown by his actual words:

[Patrick and Barbara Hartwell,

I have posted several times that bashing other members will not be allowed on this forum. This goes for everyone on here.

While I've seen postings on other forums from both sides of this mess and am fully aware of the allegations that both sides make. This is not my issue as I'm not involved, nor do I wish to be. I'm not lending creedence to either side here.

However, for the purpose of this forum, I do not condone this type of activity as it is counterproductive and serves no useful purpose in returning this government to its biblical basis. We can debate, discuss and sometimes argue over issues regarding our government, and some of these will get heated, but this type of posting will not be allowed here.

I really hate to remove members, but I will have no choice but to do so if I see this continue.

The message I mention [Barbara Hartwell's post] will be deleted immediately.

Sincerely,
Gerry Donaldson]

["Patrick Alexander" wrote: Then delete ALL of the trash put up by this slanderer-Hartwell. If you do not act evenly and fair on this then you will be suspect.]

[Gerry Donaldson wrote: That is fair. Tonight I will review previous messages for "bashing" of members and delete those messages. People on this forum will find that I am a fair person and will not hold a double standard. I am easy to get along with as long as we don't have a lot of this kind of posting which, as I said before, is counter productive. Hopefully we will not have any further conflicts on this. Gerry Donaldson]

Response of Barbara Hartwell:

[Given above] is an exchange between Gerry Donaldson and one Patrick Alexander.

[Note: "Patrick Alexander" is none other than the psycho-stalker, predicate felon, transvestite, Timothy Patrick White. At the time this was written, I suspected this, but had no evidence. Since that time, I've collected plenty.  The little coward, White, hides behind this alias and others (such as "George Mateski") so he can invade and disrupt message boards and attack targets.]

I have no idea what is being referred to here. I do not know, nor have I ever heard of, this person, "Patrick Alexander". This is the first time I have ever seen his name. Nor, obviously, have I ever read anything written by him, on this forum or elsewhere.

I have certainly never used his name in any of my writings, not knowing of his existence until this moment. Whomever he is, he does not know me. He calls me a "slanderer" and claims that I post "trash". He is entitled to his opinion. I will make a note of it, conduct my own investigation and perhaps will address him (whatever his real name may be) elsewhere. However, since he is allowed to call me by this epithet and state this opinion on this forum, please have the courtesy to allow me this response, which will be the last thing I post on this forum.

The only post of mine that I have ever seen be removed was on August 4. I assumed that since the forum is moderated, it was removed at the discretion of the moderator, Gerry Donaldson. That is his prerogative. Having the post removed does not concern me. I have posted it elsewhere.

However, I disagree with Gerry Donaldson about what constitutes "bashing". My reports are based on facts, are backed by solid evidence and expose the criminals and their minions who are destroying this country from within, which was exactly what the post in question was about. I believe in exposing crimes and corruption and naming names, especially when the criminals are persecuting me personally. These people are my enemies and I refuse to pretend otherwise. I call a spade a spade. And that is what I will continue to do.

Many of the posts I have seen here are just second hand information, common knowledge among educated and informed people for many years. Yet they are presented with a dramatic flair by the uninformed, as if they were some sort of "news flash". Personally, I find no value in them. They just take up space.

Please consider this my formal notice that I will no longer be posting here and will remove myself from the membership. I'm sure that will make everyone happy. Feel free to remove all my previous posts.

Thank you for your consideration.

Barbara Hartwell
August 6, 2005

So much for Gerry Donaldson's purported "defense" of Barbara Hartwell. And let him "LOL" to his heart's content. I don't find it amusing, though I'm sure his like-minded pals do.

This display of hypocrisy, in an attempt to cover for himself (while accusing me of being a "disinformer") leads me to wonder about the motives behind it.

So, evidently, according to Gerry Donaldson's policy, stalkers, porno-mongers, provocateurs, liars and criminals, just because they are "members" of some message board (which anyone can join under various aliases and screen names) should be coddled by a moderator who claims to be "fair."

This attitude is reminiscent of "hate crime" or "hate speech" legislation: Whatever you do, don't offend anyone. Heaven forbid! Censor and ride herd over everyone. Don't be "divisive" even when you're dealing with the enemy.
Don't take sides, either. Keep it all under control. Utter nonsense, if ever I've heard it.

Tyrannical? To the max. Autocratic? You bet it is. And highly suspect, I might add.

I will now address the latest by Vanessa Davis, the other individual named in my commentary. In this case, I have placed my comments in brackets, in the main body of text, preceded by my initials, BH. Vanessa Davis is represented by her intials, VD.

Vanessa Davis wrote:

Response to Barbara

Here we go again LMAO! Hmmm. It perplexes me why A) You chose to bring up this whole scenario and B) Why you are using this event that is really unrelated to me (since I wasn't present during the conference call) to further bash my name. Remember it wasn't I who called you to the carpet. You did a fine job of that yourself when you responded to my plea to no one in particular to grow up and quit bashing each other.

[BH: No surprise that Vanessa Davis is "perplexed." Seems to be an ongoing state of mind with her. Perhaps that is because she tends to focus on minutiae and personalities rather than the larger issues; and because she seems more interested in dissecting the (purported) motives of individuals, about which she repeatedly jumps to unwarranted conclusions, rather than basing her opinions on facts; or on direct testimony from the individual(s) in question.

Quite simply (which will become increasingly clear as this message progresses) Vanessa Davis has shown repeatedly that she does not know what she is talking about. In many cases, she simply parrots what she has heard or read in the writings of others; jumps on the party-line bandwagon of the moment; draws unsubstantiated conclusions; and finally presents a disjointed mish-mash of "information" which only succeeds in muddying the waters, while showing her own ignorance of the subjects she addresses.

As for her "plea to no one in particular" (in which she actually did refer to certain individuals, namely the moderators of RC forum and WTPC forum, though my name was not among them in her original post) I had every right to voice my opinion regarding what I saw as her aggressive attitude of admonishing whole groups of people, in vague terms, which did not address the actual ISSUES under discussion.

Further, she interpreted what were heated exchanges (such as those between Rick Stanley and Steven Yantis of WTPC) as "bashing". The old standby: Bashing. It seems a handy all-purpose word for those who wish to stem all disagreement on issues .

Serious disagreements on issues are commonplace, and to be expected, especially in political groups or forums. People get angry and outraged. Often with good reason. Some people have a temper. So what? Nothing gets resolved, one way or another, unless these issues are aired in the open. And who is Vanessa Davis, to admonish people for exercising their right to freedom of speech, including arguments in which people express their views and feelings about the behavior of others?

Vanessa Davis is clearly projecting her own feelings, standards and opinions on others and draws her conclusions from her own uninformed assumptions about others.

As several people have pointed out, with great annoyance, she also routinely puts words in the mouths of others, attatching her own flawed perceptions to their words, thereby twisting the meaning of their message.

The actual ISSUES (as well as the facts) get lost in the shuffle; and those who find it important to set the record straight in response to one of Vanessa's generalized, speculative and unfocused commentaries are forced to respond, if only to clear up the confusion and defend their own credibility or legitimacy; or that of the issues under discussion.]

VD: I and many others are not involved in your dealings with Larry Lawson, Tim White, Todd Fahey, or any other such person, that you apparently so much love to advertise. ALL of you insist on involving many others in your disputes. Which is, in my opinion, a waste of time, resources and bandwidth. Please give it a rest.

[BH: Give it a rest? Once again, Vanessa Davis presumes to dish out unsolicited advice on issues she knows absolutely nothing about.

But if she wants the facts (which I doubt) here they are: Larry Lawson, Tim White and Todd Fahey are in collusion as part of a criminal conspiracy for which I, Barbara Hartwell, am a designated target. There are other targets of this conspiracy as well. Just to name a few: Stew Webb; Rick Stanley; Karl Schwarz; Tom Flocco; Tom Heneghan; John Perna; Carl Worden; Jeremy Floyd; Geral Sosbee.

Furthermore, these provocateurs are not the ones who orchestrated this conspiracy. Various former and current government officials are responsible for that. No, Vanessa Davis is not "involved."

Why would she be? She is not a target. She poses no threat to these government criminals or their criminal minions, being a person of no consequence, one way or another, to them. She doesn't know anything; was never involved in anything; nor does she have the capacity to do anything of consequence in relation to these issues.

And speaking for myself, I have not "insisted" on involving ANYONE in any so-called "disputes", least of all a self-appointed monitor and busybody like Vanessa Davis. If anything, she "involved" herself, by butting in, of her own volition. Nobody is forcing Vanessa Davis to read my reports. And her opinion of them does not interest me.

I fight my battles with my enemies as I see fit. I expose criminal activity as both a right and a duty and I pursue justice. Vanessa Davis has no business sticking her nose where it does not belong. Her opinion counts for nothing, as these issues do not involve her. And as I've said before, it would behoove her to learn to mind her own business, before she gets caught in the crossfire.]

VD: Remember you were the one who threatened me, not the other way around.

[BH: Now, I am accused of "threatening" Vanessa Davis? Where in hell did she come up with that? At most, I warned her to stop meddling in my business. A warning she would be well-advised to heed.]

VD: You were the one to attempt to rehash this whole 3NPC conference info, not I. Do you think I should get it in writing from Mr. Vovak, who was the first member of the RC to contact him? No, I had better not, I wouldn't feel right involving someone in an argument that has nothing to do with them, unlike you Barbara.

[BH: Firstly, I did not "rehash" anything. And I never even mentioned who was the "first" to contact the organizer, nor did I make such a claim. Again, the ever-proliferating minutiae surfaces and the MAIN POINT gets lost in the nonsense.

I simply pointed out that Vanessa Davis engaged in meddling by presuming to speak FOR ME, when I had already spoken to the organizer myself, which was unnecessary and inappropriate on her part.

And that she further claimed to have "secured" a speaking engagement for me which had nothing to do with her. 1) Anyone can speak for the Revolutionary Coalition, as Rick Stanley has stated time and again. 2) Anyone could have attended this conference and spoken on behalf of a party or coalition, as long as they paid the fees.

Where this conference was concerned: Money talks. I had direct contact with the organizer regarding my own business. If Vanessa Davis feels the need to micro-manage the affairs of other people, I would advise her to stick to those who want to be "managed". I don't.

And there will be hell to pay for anyone who tries to interfere with me or my personal or professional business. Nor do I wish to get embroiled in silly arguments as a result of her misguided meddling.]

VD: I will not engage in your time wasting character assassination attempts. You are a self admitted (albeit supposedly former) government agent and for that reason and that reason alone I do not trust you further than I could throw you. You may feel the same about me, but how you feel about me is of no consequence to me, unless and until you attempt to assassinate my character publicly. You are now guilty of the same underhanded tactics as those you accuse. Congratulations Barbara. Are you proud of that COINTELPRO training?

[BH: Okay, now she's trotting out the old CIA gobbeldygook and implying that my affiliation with them is not over. Fine, whatever.....Just like so many others of her ilk, she's free to believe what she will. And once again, Vanessa Davis acts as judge, jury and executioner. She seems to favor the word "guilty" which she has slapped on me several times before.

Personally, I could not give a tinker's damn whether or not Vanessa "trusts" me. Why should she? I never asked her to. She does not even know me, nor will she ever. I am not her friend, nor her associate; have had no dealings with her, aside from setting the record straight from time to time about her misinformed forays into political "activism" which she seems to believe consists of shifting her position like a weather vane, depending on which way the wind blows; or whose attention or approval she is hoping to gain.

Nor do I have anything at all in common with her, not that I can see. And her ideas of "character assassination" don't hold water. Advising a person to MIND HER OWN BUSINESS; or expressing disagreement with her methods of operation; or countering some of her flaky ideas with the facts do not constitute character assassination.

As for her accusation of "underhanded tactics"? Nothing could be further from the truth. I say exactly what I mean, in a direct straightforward manner, without concern for who might be offended. If they can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.

And for Vanessa's edification, I was never trained in COINTELPRO nor was I ever involved in anything of the kind, despite the fact that I am extremely knowlegable about the issue due to many years (inside and outside) dealing with the problem of COINTELPRO.

She probably read something on the Internet, perhaps in one of Larry Lawson's "reports." Barbara Hartwell: COINTELPRO!!!!! Barbara Hartwell and Stew Webb: Lying government agents!!

Larry Lawson, government-sponsored disinformer. How ironic. But let's not "bash" Lawson. Let's not even bother exposing him for what he is. No, let's allow him to just continue, with impunity, spreading his lies and disinformation all over the World Wide Web, along with his cohorts, Tim White, Todd Fahey, Ken Adachi, Mike Eggleston and all the rest......

COINTELPRO was an FBI operation, run under the direction of J. Edgar Hoover, which certainly continues in other guises (and used by several agencies) to the present time.

If Vanessa Davis wants to make wild and unsubstantiated allegations about Barbara Hartwell, she should at least get the facts straight beforehand and get educated on the issues she brings into a public forum. As for COINTELPRO, she has shown herself to be clueless, as usual. Not to mention helping the opposition in the process, by shooting off her mouth indiscriminately about people and operations about which she knows nothing.]

VD: Let's dissect this response shall we:

You said:

I need to make a few points clear to set the record straight and I will have nothing further to say on this matter, as I have neither the time nor inclination to engage in arguments with anyone, including those who disagree with me.

RESPONSE: You have proven this statement false by responding in the manner in which you did, bringing up past events which apparently still bother you. Otherwise they would be a non-issue.

[BH: Not at all. Vanessa Davis assumes, once again. How very tiresome it gets...
The "issue" was the propensity of certain individuals, including herself, to repeatedly interfere in certain situations and overstep their bounds, thus creating problems for myself and certain others. And maybe she needs to take a course in logic. I have not "proved" anything. Try proving a negative, it can't be done. Again, a course in logic would be helpful.]

VD: You said:

In the past, I have been accused by both Gerry Donaldson and Vanessa Davis of "bashing" persons they claimed were "others in the movement."

RESPONSE: Again, I never accused anyone in particular, until you responded to my first e-mail asking people to quit bashing others on public forums. You stuck your own toe out on that one.

[BH: Well, once again, Vanessa Davis assumes and gets it all wrong. I never mentioned a time frame for her accusations, I simply stated the facts. In two of her responses to my commentaries, she certainly DID accuse me of "bashing others in the movement." And once again, I repeat: Exposing the facts about criminal stalkers, liars and provocateurs who have targeted me for CRIMINAL HARASSMENT does not constitute "bashing."

As to what "movement" these scumbags belong to, it might be any number of them, but the "patriot" movement certainly is not among them. And I will continue to tell the truth about these criminals as I see fit.

If my reports get "moderated out" by the Gerry Donaldson/Vanessa Davis contingent on any message board (and I certainly won't post on theirs) I'll simply post them elsewhere. I will not have these misguided people interfering with me in any way. And if they choose to call me a "disinformer"; a "government agent" or make other false claims, I will refute their claims with the facts, as I always do.

What Vanessa Davis believes about any of that is meaningless to me, but I sure as hell will set things straight on a per-case basis, in order to counter any such attempts to discredit me. Because mark my words: The government-sponsored provocateurs will seize upon all such efforts to further their cause, which Vanessa Davis and others like her are helping along quite nicely, by playing right into their hands, whether they know it or not. The term "useful idiot" comes to mind.]

VD: You said: For example, I have a psychotic stalker by the name of Todd Brendan Fahey on my case, who has followed me to any message board I have posted on for well over a year.

RESPONSE: I see a pattern developing here. You want people to mind their own business, yet you broadcast yours for the entire WWW to see. How's that for double standards? Must have something to do with that mind control programming.

[BH: Unbelievable. Now this silly woman is trying to psychoanalyze me?
Does this woman ever actually THINK before shooting her mouth off? Does she think at all?

I do not "broadcast" my "business" to anyone. A psychotic stalker targets me. The stalker fabricates outrageous lies about Barbara Hartwell, which are then disseminated by him and his cohorts (all under the control of government criminals) all over the World Wide Web. I expose his crimes and harassment for the public record.

How in hell does Vanessa Davis consider this a "double standard"? She really, really needs a course in logic, and probably one in ethics as well.

As for the "mind control programming" comment, if the best she can come up with is a cheap shot like this, maybe she's been reading Ken Adachi's disinfo tabloid too long and the neurons in her brain are misfiring. What Vanessa Davis knows about mind control programming couldn't fill a thimble.]

VD: You said: Gerry Donaldson publicly admonished me a few months back, on his Awaken American Christians forum, simply for telling the truth about the stalking and harassment of this provocateur, as well as others, including Larry Lawson and Tim White. My response was to politely set the record straight, and disengage myself from that forum.

RESPONSE: You must have done something to warrant it, namely driving people away by discussing personal problems on a public forum. People don't admonish others for no reason. You could have simply stated, that the info was untrue and asked others to contact you if they cared to know the details, then disengaged from the forum. But, you chose to publicly declare private matters in a public forum and involve others whom you claim need not be involved in your business. Your last name should have been Bush. With your Barbara can do no wrong and never needs to adjust her tactics attitude.

[BH: I think Vanessa Davis needs to get a grip. Make a reality check. She has NO IDEA what I "must have done."

Or maybe she considers Gerry Donaldson an infallible arbitrator of my business. To admonish me on a public forum is NO ONE's prerogative, not Gerry Donaldson's, not Vanessa Davis's.

And I never, at any time, "discussed personal problems on a public forum." On the contrary, I posted a REPORT, exposing a criminal.

And for her further edification, I do not seek out contact with strangers on the Internet to discuss my "personal problems." That seems to be Vanessa Davis's province, with her silly chatter board babbling.

I write and publish reports, FYI, as I see fit. They are not based on "private matters" either, as per Vanessa Davis's foolish assumptions. The perps created a very PUBLIC matter by engaging in stalking, harassment and outrageous libel.

As for my "attitude", it is NONE OF VANESSA DAVIS'S BUSINESS. Let her worry about her own attitude and leave off speculating about mine, as it is none of her concern. And once again, another cheap shot, about Bush, a typical malicious ad hominum attack, since she can't find any relevant or truthful claims to "prove" her false assumptions.]

VD: You said: Rick asked me if I would be willing to represent the Revolutionary Coalition at a Third Party National Conference in New Hampshire. I agreed to look into it and contacted the man organizing the conference directly, as Rick asked me to do. I told him I was willing to be a speaker, assuming I could get a time slot that did not conflict with my work/personal schedule, which is very tight without much free time. He and I agreed on a time and I thought it was all set. 

However, Vanessa Davis (just before the time she was publicly accusing me of being "guilty" of "bashing" people on the forum) took it upon herself to contact this man, claiming that "we" are "sending" Barbara Hartwell as a representative; and further, that she will accept ANY speaking slot available. She further (falsely) claimed to have "secured" my speaking engagement, which was a done deal between me and the organizer and had nothing to do with her.

RESPONSE: This is so full of inconsistencies, half truths and outright lies, I'm not even going to begin to touch it. If anyone is enough of a busybody, or MUST know the truth of this matter, don't take my word for it. Contact Mr. Vovak yourself at [e-mail address removed].

[BH: There are no lies; no inconsistencies; no half truths stated here. Vanessa Davis wrote a letter to Mr. Vovak which I found posted on the Internet.

But again, the point is the MEDDLING and presuming to speak for me. It never should have happened. She had no right. Aside from that, there IS no point and I don't see how the details could be of any interest to anyone, except perhaps those like Vanessa Davis, who spend their time dissecting minutiae and apparently expect others to do the same. No one speaks for me without my consent, and that is the end of the matter.]

VD: You said: As a result, I was unable to make it to the conference at all, simply because the organizer changed my time slot without telling me (on the "authority" of Vanessa Davis) and that happened to be a time when I could not make it.

RESPONSE:
How irresponsible to blame someone else for your inability to show up to the event. It's not my fault you didn't make the conference. Even if you couldn't make the time slot that Mr. Vovak allotted to you, you still should have attended the conference. At best the RC missed a chance at networking via the conference and at worst the RC's image may have been tarnished in the eyes of Mr. Vovak and others who were expecting the RC to be represented. I did not interfere in any way with the scheduling of your speaking event. I secured an agreement from Mr. Vovak that we could have a speaker there and then the scheduling was strictly between you, Rick and Mr. Vovak. I never gave anyone the authority to reschedule any time slot.

[BH: Does this tiresome woman never leave off her meddling? Or making her uninformed judgments?

Now, she presumes (once again) to tell me what I "should" be doing, what I "should" have done. Who the hell does Vanessa Davis think she is?

As if I must just "accept" what is "allotted" to me, no matter what conflicts it may cause for me. As if I do not have the right to determine my own professional work schedule. I have news for the presumptuous Vanessa Davis: I don't answer to Vanessa Davis, nor any conference organizer, nor anyone else. I am not required to explain myself or my actions either.

If she feels so compelled to interfere and to attack a person who refuses to tolerate her meddling, maybe she should see a shrink. Or maybe she could just join the Neo-Bolshevik party as a minor functionary, where she could monitor the affairs of her like-minded comrades to her heart's content.]

VD: You said: As for those who would hold my CIA background against me and/or accuse me of spreading disinfo, being a "COINTELPRO agent" or "bashing" people, nothing I can do about that. Interesting though, that some of the same people accuse Rick Stanley of being a government disinfo agent.

RESPONSE: Funny, I've never accused Rick of anything.

[BH: Same old assumptions. I never once claimed she did. Strange as it may seem to her, the world does not revolve around Vanessa Davis, nor does every word I wrote in my report pertain to her. Some discernment might be in order, along with putting aside the pole vault she uses to reach her faulty "conclusions."]

VD: You said: As for me, I'll just continue my activism in the way I see fit, the way that works for me, no need for approval of any "committees"; no interference. I've had more than enough of that in my life --from the U.S. Government, here in the Police State of America.

RESPONSE: Please do that and leave others out of your circle of bickering.
I wonder how much time you and I have wasted on this worthless communication. Save your comments because I will neither read nor respond to them. This is the last minute I will waste on Barbara Hartwell.

Peace,
Vanessa

[BH: Vanessa Davis should speak for herself. I don't "waste" my time, I use it as I see fit. But thank the Lord for small miracles! I guess this means I can finally get Vanessa Davis off my case.

Maybe she'll even start minding her own business, for a change, but I seriously doubt it. After all, even in her parting shot, she still presumes to speak for "others" as always.

There is no "circle of bickering", not that I'm involved in. And I will say what I please, when I please, about anyone who tries to interfere with me in any way. If she had simply gone about her own business (hard to figure out what that might be) without trying to interfere in mine, I would not have found it necessary to set her straight for the public record. But there you have it, there are consequences for every wrongful action.

I don't care if Vanessa Davis reads this. I didn't write it for her benefit, but for the public record. And I certainly hope she won't respond. There's only so much bullshit one person should have to wade through, and I've certainly had my fill from the Vanessa Davises of this world. But this report certainly will be posted in various places and will be read by many others.

If Rick Stanley, as the moderator of the RC forum, chooses to post it, that is his decision. I will have no problem if he chooses not to. I respect his right to determine the content of his own forum, just as I know he would respect my right about what to post on my own website.

As for the Revolutionary Coalition, I still stand in support of it, and I will continue, as long as the agenda remains uncorrupted and uncompromised; and as long as I am not considered a "liability" by the consensus of the "committee" mentality (should they take over) for not being a team player, or for bluntly speaking my mind.

There is no need for me to have dealings with those (mentioned here or not) who believe me to be a "disinformer"; a "government agent"; a "basher"...or whatever.

To each is own, that is what liberty is all about --as long as they don't attempt to interfere in any way with others. As for those who don't get the point, may God give them a love of the truth.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Liberty or Death. Don't Tread on Me.

Barbara Hartwell
November 20, 2005