Michael James Riconosciuto

[Anita]

Heaven forbid that you should ever lose a loved one to murder and then have to put up with the sort of interference that victims have endured at the hands of the NMN women. Until you've walked in those shoes, you cannot know how it feels.

[barracuda]

True enough, Anita.

[Sounder]

Has there ever been an apology, retraction or explanation from Virginia in regard to her accusations toward desertfae?

Yeah, I didn’t think so.

AD, earlier you called Virginia a ‘respected member of the conspiracy community’. The question then is; who gives respect to folk that spread accusations that are neither explained nor apologized for when found to be false? Your own actions seemed quite similar on the ‘desertfae’ thread.

It appears that credibility is not something thats required for you to accomplish your objectives.

Anyway- that's all for now- gotta run!

AD, you must be very fit, what with all the running you do.

[American Dream]

I'm not sure what you're suggesting, Sounder- sounds like you might possibly agree with Anita Langley and think that NewsMakingNews articles should be banned from here. If so, I don't agree with that.

I'm not sure if you've ever looked through their massive archive of articles, but yes- I have found them to be very, very valuable over the years. Have you read much- or any- of that archive? If you do, you may understand why I think that NMN has a important place in the conspiracy research community.

As to what really happened between Desert Fae and Virginia, I wouldn't claim to fully understand it to this day. So Virginia and Rachel made some kind of contact a few years ago- when did Virginia have enough contact or documentation of bonafides to know it really was Rachel Begley? That's not really clear.

As importantly, and more in tune with the topic of this thread, there seems to be a long and complex history between Virginia and Michael Riconosciuto, as well as his advocate/spokesperson Anita Langley. In addition, Rachel's involvement with all of this includes an early history, and a very strong belief in not only Anita Langley and Michael Riconosciuto, but also Riconosciuto's long time associate Ted Gunderson, who NMN has also been very critical of over the years. It seems that there is an important tactical alliance between Desert Fae and these others, and that there are reasonable concerns about the track records of these "friends". What everybody's goals are in all of this is not clear to me, though I certainly do believe that Rachel wants justice for the murder of her father, which is perfectly legitimate, understandable and honorable.

So what is the full history here that leads to the bad blood that we see manifested on the various threads at RI?

I wouldn't claim to fully understand it, but I do think something significant and deep is there.

So, since some of the central players in this are reading this thread, maybe we can get some more answers to what is going on.

I have wanted to get out of mediating communications but if something really relevant comes my way, might consider doing it again.

Sounder, if you really want to find out, you are also welcome to write a letter or letters and post any responses here.

[Sounder]

Sounder- sounds like you might possibly agree with Anita Langley and think that NewsMakingNews articles should be banned from here. If so, I don't agree with that.

There is no call to read something into my thinking that I never brought up or even alluded to.

I'm not sure if you've ever looked through their massive archive of articles, but yes- I have found them to be very, very valuable over the years. Have you read much- or any- of that archive? If you do, you may understand why I think that NMN has a important place in the conspiracy research community.

For the most part I do not read them because I do not know or trust Virginia, because she was caught out making false accusations.

As to what really happened between Desert Fae and Virginia, I wouldn't claim to fully understand it to this day. So Virginia and Rachel made some kind of contact a few years ago- when did Virginia have enough contact or documentation of bonafides to know it really was Rachel Begley? That's not really clear.

One cannot be faulted for supposing that Virginia, being an ‘investigative reporter’, would know from early on that Rachel Begley was indeed the murdered mans daughter. We will just forget about your insinuations in the desertfae thread.

Sounder, if you really want to find out, you are also welcome to write a letter or letters and post any responses here.

Nope, sorry, If Virginia cares about her credibility, its up to her to explain herself.

Thanks for your post, at least the question is not being totally ignored.

[desertfae]

I'm not sure what you're suggesting, Sounder- sounds like you might possibly agree with Anita Langley and think that NewsMakingNews articles should be banned from here. If so, I don't agree with that.

It sounded to me as if Sounder was asking a pretty straight forward question about why Virginia lied about me and never addressed it again when people realized she lied. Why you want to twist Sounder's straight forward question into something different says a lot.

As to what really happened between Desert Fae and Virginia, I wouldn't claim to fully understand it to this day. So Virginia and Rachel made some kind of contact a few years ago- when did Virginia have enough contact or documentation of bonafides to know it really was Rachel Begley? That's not really clear.

I have explained this multiple times, seems everyone here except you understands it, even when I've said it again in big bright colors.
As far as making contact with Virginia, that never happened. I refuse to have a private conversation with Virginia, Kate, or anyone associated with them.
I made contact with ANOTHER virginia mccullough, an author, who by then way, doesn't like the NMN VM.
So my question is, do you really need me to explain this yet again?

As importantly, and more in tune with the topic of this thread, there seems to be a long and complex history between Virginia and Michael Riconosciuto, as well as his advocate/spokesperson Anita Langley. In addition, Rachel's involvement with all of this includes an early history, and a very strong belief in not only Anita Langley and Michael Riconosciuto, but also Riconosciuto's long time associate Ted Gunderson, who NMN has also been very critical of over the years. It seems that there is an important tactical alliance between Desert Fae and these others, and that there are reasonable concerns about the track records of these "friends". What everybody's goals are in all of this is not clear to me, though I certainly do believe that Rachel wants justice for the murder of her father, which is perfectly legitimate, understandable and honorable.

As I said in the other thread.. the only thing twisted in this is in your mind.

So what is the full history here that leads to the bad blood that we see manifested on the various threads at RI?

It's been explained multiple times, so sorry you can't seem to wrap your mind around it when nearly everyone else here can.

I wouldn't claim to fully understand it, but I do think something significant and deep is there.

Again, sorry you can't seem to wrap your mind around it. You really sound a lot like VM when you talk like this. You two seem a lot alike.

I have wanted to get out of mediating communications but if something really relevant comes my way, might consider doing it again.

LOL

edit-had part of AD's quote in with my answer, corrected that.

[American Dream]

desertfae wrote:

As far as making contact with Virginia, that never happened.

There you go, Sounder- that was your answer from Rachel.

[desertfae]

desertfae wrote:

As far as making contact with Virginia, that never happened.

There you go, Sounder- that was your answer from Rachel.

Umm, my post was directed at YOU AD

[Sounder]

In case you missed it AD, this was my question.

Has there ever been an apology, retraction or explanation from Virginia in regard to her accusations toward desertfae?

I am trying to keep things simple. Perhaps I am too simple.

[American Dream]

Sounder, according to what Rachel said above I don't see any indication that Virginia should have known if desertfae really was or wasn't Ralph Boger's daughter before the rest of us did.

[desertfae]

Sounder, according to what Rachel said above I don't see any indication that Virginia should have known if desertfae really was or wasn't Ralph Boger's daughter before the rest of us did.

AD, you did not address Sounder's question, yet again. Typical.
The question was:

Has there ever been an apology, retraction or explanation from Virginia in regard to her accusations toward desertfae?

The "indication" of if VM should have know or not is not what Sounder asked.

I'll tell you one thing Sounder, since AD wants to skip around your question. VM was well aware of who I was and was well aware that I had proved my identity and that a background check was done on me at the time she wrote that I was an actress, yet she lied anyway.
As far as an apology, retraction or explanation, I haven't seen one to date, and I don't expect one either considering she knew exactly what she was doing by saying what she did.

[nathan28]

Sounder, according to what Rachel said above I don't see any indication that Virginia should have known if desertfae really was or wasn't Ralph Boger's daughter before the rest of us did.

AD, you did not address Sounder's question, yet again. Typical.
The question was:

Has there ever been an apology, retraction or explanation from Virginia in regard to her accusations toward desertfae?

The "indication" of if VM should have know or not is not what Sounder asked.

I'll tell you one thing Sounder, since AD wants to skip around your question. VM was well aware of who I was and was well aware that I had proved my identity and that a background check was done on me at the time she wrote that I was an actress, yet she lied anyway.
As far as an apology, retraction or explanation, I haven't seen one to date, and I don't expect one either considering she knew exactly what she was doing by saying what she did.

It might not be her fault. The Mae Brussels crew lives in an alternate dimension that closely resembles our own, enough so that you think it's the same and you have the same interests as them. Then, one day, you're in your kitchen making a peanut butter sandwich and you return to find that O.J. Simpson was set up by Neo-Nazis to raise enmity towards Israel--and when you disagree, you learn that you are, in fact, part of the Iran-Contra network.

[Anita]

Mae Brussell did not know Virginia McCullough and I do not believe VM acquired the files in order to further the memory of Mae. She used a ruse and promised the person holding the files that they would be available to the public. Had she in any way honored Mae, she never would have tried to help Phillip Arthur Thompson.

http://www.maebrussell.com/Transcriptions/482.html

The above transcript makes it quite clear that Mae was aware of who Thompson was, no doubt she would be horrified to think that her files fell into the hands of someone who helped Thompson.

And then there are the sockpuppets of Anne Teedham, including such clever handles as Mae Sendikson, Hag2 and Dixie Brown. These sockpuppets were banned from wikipedia for vandalizing the web pages of Michael Riconosciuto ~>including extensive links to the puppetmaster trash and NMN ~> and several related pages. Interestingly enough, in comments re: Lex Coleman, "Teedham" acknowledges that her employer requested the vandalism of the Lex/Les Coleman pages and that her employer's IP was going to be banned for sockpuppetry. <~ GREAT FIND, RACHEL!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:W ... ne_Teedham

http://www.filepie.us/?title=Wikipedia: ... ex_Coleman
Comment. I am the person who tagged the Lex Coleman article with the merger tag. I am identified as User:Anne Teedham who has been blocked indefinitely, and will no longer be a participant in anything Wikipedia. However, before my departure, my employer has requested that I "clean up" this particular loose-end because User:Petri Krohn asked me why I think the two people are the same. My reasoning goes like this: Both articles (before the above respondents began to make alterations) claimed that Lex and Lester were twin brothers yet both brothers attempted to secure authorship of the controversial book Trail of the Octopus. In addition, both brothers wanted to possess the accolades of their achievements with respect to: writing, to the Middle East, and to a variety of common interests. When I began looking closer, I found their picture; yet it was the same picture being shown at two locations: a biography of Lester at Intergirtynews.wetpaint.com while simultaneously being used to identify Lex at his website Lex Talk America. To me, this is not an indication that they are twins; rather it is an indication of a narcistic hoaxster. I doubt seriously that twins would use the exact same photographic glossies when presenting themselves. All humans have vanity. When I wrote what I wrote about Lex, Lester, Lester K., Lester Knox, II, III, Thomas Leavy, and Tomas O'Leary, I was engulfed in the particulars surrounding everyone's participation in Pan Am 103, Inslaw, and in Lester Knox Coleman's court cases. Everything suggested that a hoax was being perpetrated by a very skillful fabricator, one who had been released apparently from prison, and had returned to his Middle Eastern associations, and was trying to erase a portion of his past while also securing a more exciting future. When I suggested the merger, I was not suggesting that the entity should be punished for something like sockpuppetry (*grin*) but rather that his "biography to the world" should contain whatever a combined article could offer, and in a way which was an interesting biography of a very colorful character. It looks like you guys are onto the right track. Goodbye. I must disappear now and accept my demise without whining. (I am sorry that I really do not have the time to go into greater detail as my employer's Wikipedia IP may be permanently blocked due to whatever is done at this moment from this IP.) Annie Teedham 24.170.224.225 (talk) 14:26, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Note that Petri Kohn has also been suspended from wikipedia for making threats.

[nathan28]

So--does a significant portion of all this boil down to a fight over Brussels's files? I was under the impression that the vast majority of what she had was composed of public domain documents.

And perhaps I'm naive, but if it's so valuable--the cost to copy a banker's box is about $100-$200, and that's to pay someone else to do it for you.

[Anita]

Mae touched on things related to Thompson's group and left a trail of information, so the possibility of a cleanup operation is not so far fetched when considering the lengths these people go to in order to cover their tracks. Only recently they have murdered an investigator and his family. Back then, Mae was the only one paying attention to this. It was her references to Thompson that lead the detectives in the Thompson case to unravel much about his past, they didn't know the Valerie McDonald articles existed until I forwarded them. Think what you want about Mae, but her archive was made up largely of mainstream publications. The real point is that Virginia has a history of rounding up files, taking advantage of victim families, and gaining the trust of people by representing herself as someone knowledgeable about issues that have a trail of bodies attached to them.