It's Only Words...

Last night on AA Legends Mike Newson posted:

As I said last time “Pallasart” is working very hard to find a way to destroy me. How? By attacking me personally with words in order to destroy my reputation, that is an assault on my character, just like they did to Oma Hamou.

I was on the phone with Oma and she said this or as close to it as memory served,

QUOTE OMA HAMOU: “In my entire life not one person has hated me with such a strong passion and venom as the Bob/Rob/Pallasart clique does. Not even my ex-husband and you know what he did to me! I know of people who don’t like me, but they don’t hate me enough to go out of their way and harm me or my ability to earn a living as Bob/Rob and those associated with the Pallasart clique do! Bob says he talks with the spirit of Alexandra Russia’s last Czarista and I’ve been told that he has said that she told him that she does not like me, maybe this is his motivation? I just don’t know. I don’t know why these people do the things that they’ve done against me in the name of Nicholas II or his wife Alexandra or Russian history, period. With all my heart and soul Mike, I want Bob Atchison and whoever else they are looking at in the criminal investigation, I want them to go to jail. I pray every day for justice. I’m constantly reassured that this time around Bob and them are not going to be able to lie and wiggle out of the culpability of the crimes they’ve perpetrated against me and others. Patience is a virtue but you know me I have very little ‘patience’.”

And in the destruction of Oma Hamou, many of the rest of us have suffered. And not just because she feels emotional pain which we share in, but with our careers and income. Much of her stress has been caused because of Rob Moshein and Bob Atchison attempting to destroy her. This stress has affected her physically, so her health has suffered as well as the emotional pain, and financial ruin. Still she refuses to quit, and if she refuses can I be any less?

I want to bring up a major point. I have not said Bob/Rob is/are a flawed person(s) intrinsically. I have said that what they have done, that is their behaviors towards my friend are wrong. No one should have to suffer as she has for the past six years. What has she done that is so horrible as to deserve this treatment for six long years? I’ve defended her, and this justifies whatever they want to do to me?

Read back over what I have written. I have not in cold blood sat down and tried to find a way to attack either of them as a person. I have found flaws in what they have tried to say Oma Hamou was, and I have attacked those flaws to show that they have an obsession to destroy her. I have pointed out that this is their standard method when they don’t like someone or want them “removed” such as what they did or attempted to do to; Penny Wilson, Peter Kurth and Greg King, (those are just examples.) I have pointed out specifics directly associated with their actions toward Oma, but I have not cast about for ways to say that they are intrinsically evil. According to the inner circle they have consulted with lawyers to see if they can get me on libel, the report was that they could not as I was not telling an untruth. That is did “they” say/do those things? As the answer was yes, then what I write to educate you about those actions/words can not be considered libel. As an aside --- consider this, Rob/Bob have said that they are just reporting public records and as such it is not libel. However, if you have read what they concluded about the records you will find it fits the Yellow Journalism method of controlling the reader by offering truth, truth, truth, and then the lie and usually a “Big Lie” which turns it into libel.

What I have heard from the inner circle is that they are going to try and figure out how to attack me personally and say that I am intrinsically evil. From what Rob Moshein has said in the past I wager it is via the “Porn” angle, and yes I have taken photos of nudes, try visiting any great art museum and look at the works there. The question is what did I see inside myself, and what did I try to show to my audience?).

It has already started by the creation of my own little “Hate Mike” Blog. That is --- find and point out all my flaws and feet of clay, (real or imagined. With a core of truth, or without, and then twisted for maximum effect in destroying someone, typically slipping in “the Big Lie” to finish it off with a cherry on top of the whipping cream) and then publish them all for the world to see, better yet we will force the world to come and see them. As when we destroy him as a person, we destroy him as a “White Knight”, and Oma Hamou is left alone and she will “die.”

Well you know, it won’t be hard, I’ve never claimed to be a paragon of virtue. I am human, maybe more so than most. I have flaws; physically, mentally, morally, emotionally, financially, you name it… I have fallen, (many times) picked my self up and kept going. I have made mistakes, MANY mistakes, I have tried to learn and keep on going. I have done things that I am not proud of. I have also done things that I am proud of. Possibly my only strength is that I keep getting back up. Maybe what I am trying to say is that I am human, possibly more so than many, but still human with normal human weaknesses. Many a White Knight spent their nights drinking and whoring way back in history, as was the custom of the land, yet in the morning they were back in the saddle and off to protect the innocent. Did what they do at night that we might have found distasteful take away from the good they did? Do my past, (or even my present) mistakes counter the logic behind what I show that they have attempted to do to Oma is wrong or incorrect? Do my personal flaws and failings invalidate the points of logic that I have used to show that what they said about Oma was not true, or invalidate the Yellow Journalism propaganda techniques that I have shown to be in use against Oma (and now myself?)

In a way I feel like Obi Wan going up against Darth Vader in episode four, “You can't win Darth. If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine." Some how I feel that, for those who count, this predicted attack on my self will change the tide of sympathy, and my words will be heard with the strength of a martyr.

A Mirror to the soul

When you look at whatever Rob Moshein/Bob Atchison find/create about me, and how they twist it, and the conclusions that they come up with… remember this is how you see inside of someone. You take what they find personally in someone else and that typically is what that person has inside themselves. You have to have it inside yourself before you can see it in others, unless you have had a lot of training/experience and even then your gut reaction is based on what is inside yourself. In creating a web site to say Who is Mike Newson they have started that process, as we can now look at their actions and see inside them, to their very core. Question, what do you see when you look at “them” in this light? I found inside of Oma much that is beautiful, desirable and admirable, They found much that was ugly and evil. So which is she? Could I suggest that she is human also and maybe a little of both sides as are we all? The question is why do I see what I see in Oma, and why do they see what they see in her?

You know, even now I see much to be admired in Bob Atchison, his drive and determination and outright love of things about the last of the Czars. Rob Moshein in his all consuming love (as I perceive it) for Bob, even though Bob downplays Rob’s contributions, still I see much love between the two. Yes I hate what they have done to my friend, and myself, and even fear what they will yet do. But I don’t hate them. It is not inside me to see evil, instead I see that which is good and beautiful. That I pity them for what they see in others such as Oma in terms of evil and ugly, does not leave me wide open for them to control me. As I am aware of what the emotion of pity can open wide in a person in terms of controlling that person.

That is, do you find me making personal attacks about Bob Atchison or Rob Moshein? Do I attack the way they eat? The way they walk? Their choice in movies? Their choice in loves? Or do I say, look they said XYZ about Oma and it is incorrect because of ZYX? Or maybe look for the patterns, because they did this to this person, and the same things again over here and over there? Am I finding isolated events that do not relate to the Oma vs. Bob war of word and saying OH! look here, this is the kind of person they Really are!!!! Don’t believe them about this other thing over there because really they are this horrible person.

Am I searching out their flaws with the cold blooded intention of only destroying? Making background checks, searching for their personal shortcomings? Or is what I talk about directly related to what they have said or done towards Oma Hamou? Is what I have done, done in defense, because of what they have done to one of my friends, and no one else was willing to stand up and be the target, justify their attack on me?. (Actually many have stood up to be targets, and were targeted and destroyed. I seem to have been harder to destroy so it appears that they are going to take a special interest in destroying me this time.)

Why is it that instead of attacking my logic as I point out the fallacies in what they have used to attack Oma Hamou with that instead they attack my self as a person? Is it that they can not counter my arguments as they are true and thus they feel forced to destroy me as the only way to counter what I have pointed out? Have they (either one or both) become my “victim,” think about it if you have heard this from “them.” Are they Oma’s victim? Have you been lead to pity them? What has the emotion of pity done to your objectivity? Has it destroyed it to the point that you feel that Oma and I deserve whatever they want to do to us? Think about this factor… Who was it that first attacked?

Also consider what damage is done to the sword that is used to attack with. Or more specifically when one wields a sword against one person by maliciously gossiping about what happened with someone else, then both will be hurt. The person who the words were meant to attack, and the person who was the sword of that attack.

Father Markell was the sword of attack and it hurt him so bad that he had to go before his superiors and defend himself. So who was really the one hurt? Oma or Father Markell, or was it both equally, and the one wielding the sword (Bob/Rob) walked away.

Now we have the family of the elder Morton that was recently wielded as a sword against Oma. Who was hurt? What did “their” wielding that particular sword against Oma do to that family? Could it be that once again “they” have hurt the very people that they were using as a weapon against Oma? And the one wielding the sword (Bob Atchison/Rob Moshein) walked away.

Now the question is, who else will they hurt in their quest to destroy me as well as Oma Hamou?

Do the ends justify the means?

Think about these thoughts, see if you can see patterns and where do these ideas fit?

(Note, “They,” in the following bullet point list, is not the Royal “They” - that is it is not intended to indicate those from Pallasart as a group, but rather the person or persons who do the action or behavior talked about. Or - as the sentence would normally read and that word order would indicate” Also think of the fact that this list was one that described a specific group of people with similar known and recognized traits so that people could learn to recognize this group and how some people react to them...)

· very few people, when put to the test, have the integrity and moral courage to stand up against bullying, harassment, corruption etc; the target is selected often because that person has this moral courage; most people will pass by on the other side, only targets have the integrity to be a good Samaritan

· bystanders think that if they keep their heads down, their mouths shut and pretend nothing is happening then it won't happen to them [wrong – their turn will come eventually]

· they exert power and control by a combination of selectively withholding information and spreading disinformation, therefore everyone has a distorted picture - of only what they want them to see

· they go to great lengths to undermine their target

· they are masters of manipulation, and are fond of manipulating people through their emotions (eg guilt)

· they are adept at manipulating peoples' perceptions with intent to engender a negative view of the target in the minds of bystanders, this is achieved through undermining, including the creation of doubts and suspicions and the sharing of false concerns

· They poison the atmosphere and actively poison people's minds against the target

· when close to being outwitted and exposed, they feign victimhood and turn the focus on themselves - another example of manipulating people through their emotion of guilt, eg sympathy, feeling sorry

· most bystanders are hoodwinked by their ruses for abdicating responsibility and evading accountability

· they encourage and manipulate bystanders to lie, act dishonorably and dishonestly, withhold information and spread misinformation

· they manipulate bystanders to punish the target for alleged infractions, ie the bystanders become instruments of harassment

· they are often able to bewitch one especially emotionally needy bystander into being their easily controlled spokesperson / advocate / supporter / denier

· they often form an alliance with someone who has the same behavior profile, thus increasing the levels of threat, fear and dysfunction

· they are able to charm and manipulate a number of bystanders to act as supporters, assistants, reinforcers, appeasers, deniers, apologists and minimisers

· some people gain gratification (a perverse feeling of satisfaction) from seeing others in distress and thus become complicit

· they groom bystanders, and the target, to believe the target deserves the treatment they are receiving

· they are a smooth individual who excels at deception using a combination of compulsive lying, Jekyll and Hyde nature, manipulation, mimicry of normal behavior, self-assuredness and charm

· the bystanders see only the Dr Jekyll side of the bully, but only the target sees the Mr/Ms Hyde side; Dr Jekyll is sweet and charming, Mr/Ms Hyde is evil; Mr/Ms Hyde is the real person, Dr Jekyll is an act

· apathy is rampant · denial is everywhere