Refutation of the disinformation about Monica Pignotti

Posts tagged ‘Daniel Ibn Zayd’

Altered Posting from a Private Yahoo Group Adoption List Serv

How many times have I written that the anonymous posters have sunk to a new low, or words to that effect? Now I am saying it again.

Observe how once again, my cyberstalker tries to flip things and make me out to be someone with “bizarre” delusions. What I am giving here is a factual, provable account of the bizarre actions of my cyberstalker. Big difference. Since already, misportrayals of this are being posted, I want to make it crystal clear that I am not making any claims that I know how the following incident happened. I only know that it did happen because I saw both the original and the altered posting and have retained copies of both as evidence.

A few days ago, one of the usual defamatory smear postings about me appeared on alt.religion.scientology. This one named a man I had never even heard of, claiming that he and I were lovers and the usual obscene lies that are posted about me that are characteristic of the anonymous posters conducting this smear campaign. I don’t usually post these links, but in this case I choose to, so it can go on the record how ugly this smear campaign has become:

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.scientology/browse_thread/thread/85d\
a4ef078ed3d04

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.scientology/browse_thread/thread/f01\
67b21ea6c0fa9

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.scientology/browse_thread/thread/e68\
677a532aa4f05

The claim was made that this person had made a posting to a Yahoo “chat room” (late I found out it was a Yahoo group list serv on Russian Adoption) and the posting said that I was being funded by a foundation for my critical work and for the (now-dismissed) lawsuit against me. This, of course is absolutely false. The posting also claimed that I had called an adoptive mother a “crack whore” which of course is another absurd lie. I challenged the anonymous poster to show me proof of what had been posted.

Shortly thereafter, another anonymous posting was made to alt.religion.scientology with a posting said to be from the Russian Adoption Yahoo list serv and also gave the name and e-mail address of the individual who they claimed posted it. I contacted that individual. He responded that he had no idea who I was (not surprising as I had no idea who he was either). I saw his actual posting and found that the anonymous posters had substantially altered it with their own bizarre fabrications including the “crack whore” statement which the individual in question did not make, nor did he make any statement about me, since he doesn’t even know me and has never heard of me.

Another interesting difference is that the actual, original postings were highly critical of Heather Forbes and also indirectly mentioned Ronald Federici (reference to Angelina Jolie adoption), but in the altered version, Forbes name was removed and the name of another therapist, Bryan Post, was substituted. It looks to me as if whoever the anonymous poster is,  wanted to make sure to leave Federici and Forbes’ names out of it and wanted me to believe that Bryan Post was responsible. Sorry, I’m not buying that. Although I am obviously no fan of Brian Post’s work, I do not believe Bryan Post is responsible because he was barely even mentioned in the actual posting, which focused on Heather Forbes. It looks to me like a posting from a private Yahoo Group list serv somehow got into the hands of the people conducting the smear campaign against me and the list serv has some passionate supporters of none other than Ronald Federici and Heather Forbes. Since the list serv is not public and cannot be viewed by non-members online, someone from the list serv obviously had to have forwarded the posting to someone else and at some point, it must have fallen into the hands of the anonymous cyber stalker who has been posting malicious lies about me. People can draw their own conclusions as to who the top suspects are. I’m not accusing any of the adoptive parents of this. Quite possibly they innocently forwarded this to someone who then got it into the hands of the anonymous posters, but there parents might want to take note of what is being done with those postings.

This is a new low and it once again, makes me ask how it is that such malicious lies are rationalized by these people. If the therapists they are defending are so wonderful, why the need to stoop so low and attack critics in this way? People who have valid arguments have no need to lie about people with whom they disagree.

It is also interesting that the posting once again implies that I am in a conspiracy with any critic of Federici or Forbes when in fact, as happened previously with Daniel Ibn Zayd (who I also had never heard of before we were accused of working together). What is really happening is that people who have never even met or heard of one another are coming to their own independent conclusions about the work of Ronald Federici, Heather Forbes, Bryan Post and certain other therapists. There is no conspiracy.

Ronald Federici attempted to sue five individuals and an organization for conspiracy, but the case was dismissed by a Virginia Federal judge on March 4, 2011 and the time to appeal has now passed, so the case is now closed.  The case was dismissed, for me, for jurisdiction and also, more importantly, failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. One of the Exhibits was a blog by Daniel Ibn Zayd, someone who none of the defendants had any ties to. Thankfully, the right to free speech has prevailed. It is also interesting to note that the smear campaign quieted down considerably for the duration of the lawsuit and within days of its dismissal, the smear campaign on the internet resumed in full force and even escalated during the month of March. There were postings on an almost daily basis with all kinds of defamatory lies about me including a complete fabrication about me on a “cheaters” website claiming I broke up a marriage in New York and then the link was posted repeatedly, so this complete fabrication was Google bombed to come up on the first page of a Google search in my name.

So to state the obvious, for the record, I have never called anyone a “crack whore” and I certainly do not receive any funding for my critical work exposing what I consider to be potentially harmful and bogus therapies and no foundation funded my defense in Federici v Pignotti.

Advertisements

Defamatory Internet Postings about Monica Pignotti: A Typical Day

Here is a typical day of defamatory internet postings about me just to give people an idea of how outrageous this smear campaign has become.

Today, March 27, 2011, following the appearance of Daniel Ibn Zayd’s commentary on the dismissal of Federici v Pignotti et al and Federici’s “response” to critics and my subsequent commentary on this blog about it, anonymous postings were made about me to the following newsgroups by someone who was obviously very upset about this:

http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.lebanon/topics

Monica Pignotti and the Black Hand of Jhadist Terror:

Makes completely false and obviously malicious defamatory statements about me with regard to terrorist activities that are not even remotely true.

Daniel Ibn Zayd and Monica Pignotti:

Falsely states that I am appearing in court on charges of association with a terrorist and that I worked for a flight school in Florida prior to 9/11. Again, both malicious lies that can be completely refuted with a search on PACER that shows the only court case I have been involved in is Federici v Pignotti et al which is now dismissed and has nothing to do with terrorism. The only other lawsuit I was even named in was a very short-lived counter suit by Hulda Clark’s organization 10 years ago, but I was never served with papers for that one so I was never actually sued and the suit was withdrawn. This one is especially ugly since in fact, I was living in New York City at the time of the 9/11 terrorist attacks and watched the towers collapse which I could see from the hospital where I was working at the time. I had lived there for 21 years prior to that and did not move to Florida until the summer of 2006.

Monica Pignotti and Ibn Zayd: Mass Murder Plot:

Again, obviously false and defamatory. Qualifies as libel per se if the anonymous coward who posted this can be identified.

alt.religion.scientology:

Monica Pignotti: Personality Disorder?

Falsely states that I have a personality disorder and “abandoned” Advocates for Children in Therapy when I have done nothing of the kind and obviously online diagnosis by an anonymous coward is not valid. Newsflash: In non-cultic organizations, people are free to come and go as they so choose for reasons that have nothing to do with abandonment.

Additionally, whoever wrote this (I hope not a licensed mental health professional!) appears to have a misunderstanding of how abandonment relates to borderline personality disorder. The issue with people with BPD is that they feel they have been abandoned and fear being abandoned, not that they abandoned others although they do tend to have ambivalent relationships with others. This does not mean, however that anyone who leaves an organization or severs ties with people has BPD. That’s the kind of assumption an amateur would make.

http://groups.google.com/group/misc.legal/topics

Inside the Monica Pignotti — ACT Split

More lies by an anonymous coward who knows nothing about this matter, which had nothing to do with legal fees or voting machine cases that have no relevance whatsoever to my life. The public records show that I had a completely different law firm represent me from AC T so that completely refutes the lie that there was a dispute over legal fees.  I recommend that the anonymous coward, if he has any ability to read, look at the legal documents and which law firms were representing each of us. Obviously someone is fishing for info that they are not going to get.

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/topics

Yet another posting lying that I was fired from FSU when I was not (a lie about me that has been repeated endlessly for over a year, although the postings abated during the 3-month period of Federici v Pignotti et al.) I graduated from FSU and left in good standing in every way and have references to prove it that I supply to legitimate people requesting them.

That posting linked to another posting two days earlier on the same newsgroup that made defamatory statements about me with regard to FSU and divorce cases when I have never been involved in any divorce cases, ever in my life.

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.food.cooking/

Monica Pignotti is a TRAITOR

More lies about my relationship with ACT saying I abandon things and “write sensational articles”. I have written no such articles about ACT nor do I have any intention of doing so and the statement I am “known” as a “social work sex toy” is patently absurd.  Actually the only ones to use this term to describe me as this are the anonymous cowards who have been endlessly repeating that phrase. Anyone who knows me would be rolling on the floor laughing, as anyone who knows me knows how not like me that description is.

Monica Pignotti: Domestic Violence

Also from rec.food.cooking, lies that I was fired from FSU and have convictions for witness tampering and fraud. In fact, I have never been fired from any professional job I have ever held and a search of any criminal database or court database such as PACER will show that they will come up squeaky clean — no criminal convictions or charges of any kind, ever.

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.skeptic/browse_thread/thread/a3e0f8707aeb769c#

Monica Pignotti: Be Afraid, Very Afraid

In addition to the usual defamation and misleading portrayals (e.g. Bruce Thyer although like many people has in the past been divorced, he has not divorced recently and has been happily married for 20 years). The subject header of this posting is bordering on crossing the line into a threat.

Also from Sci.Skptic:

Monica Pignotti: Hot for Teacher

More of the usual obscene defamatation.

I post these just to reveal to readers what a typical day defamatory internet postings about me has been like, ever since the dismissal of Federici v Pignotti et al and I’m not even sure that I have listed all the postings that have appeared about me today. Coincidence? You be the judge.

And again, for people who think I should just ignore these and they will go away, they won’t. I have tried that and it didn’t work. The only thing that made the postings mostly go away was the existence of legal action — they greatly decreased with no overtly libelous postings during the period Federici v Pignotti was active. Following its dismissal, the smear campaign resumed in full force. Coincidence? You be the judge.

Please keep in mind that cyber abuse is a relatively new phenomenon and so don’t be so certain that the prevailing wisdom to ignore cyber abusers is correct. Remember when the common wisdom for rape victims was not to fight back and just go along with it so they wouldn’t get killed? Well, that one turned out to be very wrong and the current advice is for rape victims to scream as loudly as they can and fight back. In my opinion, the same goes for victims of cyber abuse and I refuse to stand silently by while my reputation is being trashed by malicious liars.

I just noticed in my site stats for this blog (which gives terms people searched on to get here) that someone searched on the question “what kind of information do i need on a poster for a smear campaign?”

To respond to that question, if the smear campaign against me is any indication, my answer would be no information whatsoever. Entire smear campaigns can be based upon nothing more than fabrications, especially if the people posting are able to remain anonymous and not accountable for their actions.

Daniel Ibn Zayd Comments on Federici v Pignotti et al and Ronald Federici’s Subsequent Responses

Daniel Ibn Zayd, whose blog was listed as Appendix I in Ronald Federici’s complaint in the now-dismissed Federici v Pignotti et al,  has now commented on his own blog on this case and on Ronald Federici’s response. [update September 21, 2011: Daniel Ibn Zayd recently listed Jean Mercer as an “adoption criminal” which should remove any remaining doubt as to whether he was in a “conspiracy” with defendants. This charge was ludicrous to begin with and the entire conspiracy charge was dismissed, but this is conclusive proof that there was no conspiracy. Most ironically, he appears to have placed Ronald Federici and Jean Mercer in the same category!].

He makes the very valid point that rather than being in the conspiracy alleged, the people Dr. Ronald Federici named as his “critics” are individuals, each with our own perspective on various issues who happen to have, independently, criticized the work of  Dr. Federici and any correspondence we had was only in reaction to Federici’s attempt to lump us all together.

On a smaller scale this is not unlike what has happened with the evolution of criticism of Scientology on the internet. Critics, not associated with one another, each with their own perspective, had reason to criticize Scientology. Although not in a conspiracy with one another, the criticism of Scientology has gained increasing momentum over the years. While some individuals have fallen by the wayside and have been defeated by Scientology, ultimately giving in and settling in various lawsuits, when we look at the big picture, any attempts to suppress criticism has only motivated even more critics to speak out against abuses, fight for their rights to free speech and continue to speak out.

Some critics of Scientology are motivated to do so because they themselves are former members of Scientology, others have had family members involved in Scientology and still others are very concerned about attempts to limit free speech on the internet by unwarranted copyright violation complaints and other attempts to curtail internet free speech. At times, the critics themselves had heated disagreements and argued and fought with one another — this is all very healthy and shows that this is not some kind of cult, but rather a movement of independent-minded individuals, each with their own views. Critics of Scientology represent all age groups, many different nations and come from diverse backgrounds, some still believe in Scientology itself whereas others consider it utter bunk, but what they have in common is their desire to put an end to what in their opinion are abuses within Scientology’s organization. This is not a “conspiracy” but rather, the evolution of a movement consisting of people who are exercising their rights to free speech on the internet. Those who try to stop this only end up making themselves look worse.

As recent discussions on the newsgroup alt.religion.scientology (ARS) suggest, some of the advocates of internet free speech who are critics of Scientology have also become interested in Federici v Pignotti et al. and Ronald Federici’s subsequent responses to his critics. These are people who were never his clients or even initially critics of his therapy, but became aware of him only because of postings to ARS and other usenet groups — not my postings or the postings of any critics, but postings made by unidentified individuals under various pseudonyms that were glorifying Federici and trashing his critics. This appears to have been the beginning of the anonymous smear campaign against Advocates for Children Therapy and several of Federici’s critics. Interest seems to have increased even more, following Federici v Pignotti et al. Disclaimer: Before clicking on any of the links to ARS, please be advised that the culture within these public newsgroups can include some people who use colorful language including some of the smear postings against me, so if you are offended by this type of speech, don’t click on the links.

The Adoption Cruise: Monica Pignotti Sets the Record Straight

On September 28, 2010, an article appeared on an adoption website [article has since been deleted] announcing a conference on adoption, a cruise that is scheduled for late September/early October of 2011.  What is key to recognize is that I had absolutely no knowledge of this discussion that occurred on that article until after the comments had been closed, nor did anyone else involved with Advocates for Children in Therapy (ACT). In other words, that entire discussion took place without my participation or the participation of anyone from ACT. It is also a lie that I wanted to stop or in any way sabotage this cruise. I have no intention of doing so and I wish the organizers of this event well and hope it is a successful event. I am not opposed to all adoption. What I am opposed to is abuses of the system and interventions that target adoptees which may cause harm.

Both relevant articles have been deleted. To provide a summary of what transpired, the article announced that Ronald Federici was scheduled as one of the keynote speakers. The first person to respond was someone using the name, Linda. Clicking on Linda’s name in her posting, readily identifies her as a blogger who writes about being an adoptee.  Linda was critical of Ronald Federici and soon after someone named Daniel Ibn Zayd responded with a critical comment about Dr. Federici. At that point, someone identifying himself as Dr. Federici posted a comment that the critical comments were coming from Linda Rosa and Larry Sarner. It appears that Federici mistook Linda, the adoptee blogger for Linda Rosa. Dr. Federici accused them of making libelous and ridiculous statements and requested that they not be allowed to post further and that the postings currently up be removed. This request for removal of the negative comments (that were not even made by Linda Rosa and Larry Sarner) elicited even more negative comments from people upset with the attempt being made to suppress criticism. The moderator of the board allowed the critical discussion to continue and the comments remained up for several months, although more recently, they appear to have been deleted.

The discussion continued until 7:37AM on September 29, when someone using the name DCParent posted, for the first time bringing my name into the discussion with the usual denigrations of my “background” that I have gotten used to by now from Federici supporters (for example, associating my name with Scientology, neglecting to mention that I left and completely repudiated Scientology in 1976 and associating my name with “energy therapy” neglecting to mention that I left and completely repudiated such therapy over 7 years ago and am now a well known, published critic  of it). In any case, after that posting, the thread was closed. Remember, at this point in time, I knew absolutely nothing of this discussion.

I did not learn of the discussion until a rather creepy posting appeared about me entitled Monica Pignotti at the Center of Adoption Controversy! several hours later on alt.religion.scientology that provided the link to the adoption cruise discussion. I was hardly “at the center”. I wasn’t even involved in the aforementioned discussion and my name was only mentioned once, at the very end. The posting lied that I had “teamed up with” Daniel Ibn Zayd who they called a HAMAS supporter to “attack an adoption cruise ship” which clearly is a malicious lie. In the first place, up to that point, I had never even heard of Ibn Zayd so I certainly was and am not involved in any sort of conspiracy with him. In the second place, Ibn Zayd later set the record straight that he is not connected with HAMAS and a joking remark he had made had been taken out of context. However, to this date, I have never met or even directly corresponded with Ibn Zayd although I did later make a comment on his blog, ironically correcting him on something he said about Dr. Federici, letting him know that Federici does not practice rebirthing, which he then thanked me for and corrected. This demonstrates intention on my part and on his to present only accurate information and Ibn Zayd removed the statement that was not correct and thanked me. Federici should also be thanking me, since I actually helped correct and remove a negative comment about Dr. Federici! I did this because I care about truth and accuracy for all concerned, even the people I criticize.

At any rate, to get back to the alt.religion.scientology posting, made hours after the discussion had been closed that I even learned about this “controversy”. I went over to the website to check it out but was unable to add my comment because the discussion was closed. To sum it up, a number of people were opposed to Dr. Federici being a keynote speaker who had no relationship whatsoever with me or with ACT. Nevertheless, for the past 10 days, ridiculous postings have been appearing about me all over the internet, saying I have terrorist connections, one posting even saying that I have been reported to the FBI’s terrorist hotline. Presumably that FBI hotline had a reliable way to deal with crank complaints, but what this shows is how far some people are willing to go to attempt to discredit me, by telling bald faced, crazy lies such as this. Ironically, less than a month prior to that, Larry Sarner and I had been falsely accused of being Quran burners and if the FBI were to decide to check me out, they would immediately find out about this glaring contradiction, along with notice the vicious internet smear campaign I have been subjected to, for the past year and a half.

Following the initial thread about the adoption cruise, the people who run the website posted another article, explaining why they had chosen Dr. Federici as keynote speaker and stating that they stood by that.  However, later, after a number of additional negative comments, by people I did not know, they decided to cancel Dr. Federici. It appears that I, along with other people involved with ACT are being blamed for this when we had nothing to do with it and were not even aware of the initial discussion where so many people had protested and clashed with other people who were posting who supported Dr. Federici.

Since the comments on that article were open, for the purposes of clearing up the misinformation that had been posted about me, I sent a comment, clarifying what my position actually was on Federici and letting people know I had no involvement in the original thread, even though I had been accused of trying to sink the ship. I received a number of very supportive comments from people, although those comments also ended and were closed after a posting from a Federici supporter who did not provide a name, trashing me, denigrating any of the posters who had been critical of Dr. Federici and suggesting that people who were critical of Federici not be allowed to post.

The person asked “Can you say you actually helped?” My answer is yes, I can say I have helped. My MSW internship was working with inner city children and I believe I helped several of those children and I loved working with them using play therapy. I also believe I helped several children with serious behavior problems, some of whom were adopted, when for nearly 5 years I worked for a neuropsychologist and 90% of that work had absolutely nothing to do with TFT, to refute the way this has been misportrayed.

I also am currently providing help. Educating the public about novel unsupported treatments, especially those that may be potentially harmful and are untested for safety and efficacy and working to disseminate evidence  based approaches does ultimately help children. So my answer to that question, to paraphrase Obama, is yes I can.

The smear campaign against me continues, with anonymous lies being posted that I am a terrorist and have connections to HAMAS. One anonymous posting even stated that my PhD was funded by HAMAS. If that isn’t libel and defamation of me, I don’t know what is! This is especially ridiculous, since it is well known that FSU funds its own PhD students with full tuition reimbursement and a stipend and I covered any additional expenses I had with student loans that I am currently paying off.

The accusations that I am in this for financial gain are the most ludicrous of all, since I have not made any money from any of this, nor have I ever attempted to. The anonymous postings claiming to be me offering adoption services are forgeries, posted through anonymous remailers. I never post through anonymous remailers, so anyone seeing such postings can be 100% certain they did not come from me. This appears to be yet another attempt to make me look like a business competitor when I am far from being one. I am a scholar and my interest is in facts and evidence regarding therapies that are being offered to people.

What all this demonstrates is the lengths that some people will go to, in order to discredit anyone who is critical of their favored therapies. Someone is obviously going to great lengths to attempt to silence me.

This is the truth about what occurred, which hopefully will set the record straight about all the lies and false innuendo that have been posted about me being a terrorist and trying to sink a ship.

Tag Cloud