Chip Berlet,
SlimVirgin, and
Wikipedia
Chip Berlet,
SlimVirgin, and
Wikipedia
By the end of the Twentieth Century, Berlet had become something of a shopworn commodity. Seeking a new audience, he joined Wikipedia.
There are complex and self-contradictory rules. According to Wikipedia policy, articles must reflect a "neutral point of view" -- but some points of view are more neutral than others. A Point of View (or "POV") must be backed by sources that are "verifiable," but also "notable," and the question of "notability" becomes an arena of battle. There is a proscription against "original research," i.e., opinions that are not demonstrably backed by a "notable" authority. There are also rules about behavior on the "talk pages," where editors debate how the articles ought to be edited. "Personal attacks" in the conduct of such debates are forbidden. What exactly constitutes a "personal attack" is also subject to debate, and the Wikipedia authorities use a great deal of interpretative license in determining when the rules have been violated, and how to punish the transgressors. Finally, there is a policy called "Ignore all rules," which increases the latitude of the authorities even further.
Wikipedia addicts compete to make their opinions dominate articles on subjects of interest to them, and for hard-core users, it becomes a Nietschzean struggle of the wills, with the losers often being banned from the community forever. Wikipedia editing and policy making is done by "consensus," which in practical terms means that the successful editor is the one who develops a knack for cajoling or threatening others into alliances of convenience. Aspiring contestants quickly learn the pecking order, and eagerly kiss the posteriors of those above them, while abusing those below them. There are, of course, many earnest individuals who merely desire to edit an encyclopedia as a hobby, but the minute they come into conflict with the more aggressive types, they are road kill.
It is important to note, however, that Wikipedia has a negative impact on millions of people, beyond just the participants, for the following reason: internet search engines, such as Google, give very high ranking to Wikipedia articles, so the unsuspecting internet searcher may happen upon a Wikipedia article that has been loaded with misinformation by someone who has successfully imposed their agenda on a supposedly "authoritative" encyclopedia article. Someone like, for example, Chip Berlet.
 |
He soon found an ally in "SlimVirgin", an editor that joined shortly after Chip in late 2004. Their politics were similar, and SlimVirgin quickly learned that the way to win debates at Wikipedia is not by presenting a reasoned argument, but by "gaming the system": one must familiarize oneself with the rules, loudly accuse one's opponent of violating them, and then get the opponent banned -- problem solved. SlimVirgin was so successful at playing this game that she quickly became an administrator or "admin," giving her the power to ban political opponents herself.
Meanwhile, Chip also had something to offer to this symbiotic relationship. Wikipedia rules require that all opinions inserted into the articles must come from a previously published source. Voilà! Chip can write anything he likes, post it at the website of Political Research Associates, and it has been published! Suddenly Chip's writings were in demand, if not in the real world, at least in the nerd-obsessive battleground of Wikipedia.
But who was SlimVirgin? Her identity was a mystery, and as she ascended in the Wikipedia hierarchy, she made many enemies in her ruthless quest for power. The website of Wikipedia critics, the Wikipedia Review, voted her the Most Abusive Admin of 2006. So many editors were banned on various pretexts, merely for arguing with her at Wikipedia, that the quest for her real-life identity began.
One person whom SlimVirgin had managed to seriously offend was Daniel Brandt, pioneering cyber-sleuth and founder of Wikipedia-Watch.org. Brandt, working from the tiniest of clues (for SlimVirgin knew her way around the internet, and covered her tracks with care,) developed the theory that SlimVirgin was actually Sarah McEwan of Alberta, Canada. But not long after, he found other evidence that she was a journalist named Linda Mack, who had lived in England and researched the Lockerbie bombing.
How do you eat an elephant? "One bite at a
time." Let's go one bite at a time.
I am sure you, dear reader, share my discomfort in
confronting a woman such as SlimVirgin. I have no
interest in hurting anyone, especially a fragile
woman from my past. On the other hand, we didn't go
at SlimVirgin, SlimVirgin came at us, and she is
hurting dozens and misleading millions. I want to
take the sniper down with a shot to the knee. You
may think it silly of me to give you the detail I
give here, but if you are welling to suffer a
lengthy story, I believe I can give answers to
questions you are debating.
I do not have a photo of Linda, but she is worth
describing. She was my age, that is, in 1988 we
were both mid-twenties, older than the other
students by a few years: I had been sick for a few
years before starting grad school, and she had
taken a few years to do other things as well.
Pretty, if not quite beautiful (though she might
have been if she wanted), and very, very striking,
so much that the few months I knew her left me with
vivid mental snapshots of her after these eighteen
years.
Medium height, well proportioned but not athletic,
skin so pale it was a bit eerie. Her hair was
either red-dyed-black, or black-dyed-red, and was
quite long except for bangs cut flat across her
brow (think of "Morticia"). She wore blood-red
lipstick. Here I confess a data corruption error,
because in most images her eyes are unremarkable,
but in one they are not. We had been sitting on a
bench in the afternoon, talking, then I said
something that I thought innocuous, and she
responded, "Patrick (dramatic pause) I'm so hurt
that you said that." I thought she was kidding and
looked into her eyes. In this memory alone they are
incredibly light blue, huge, with thick lashes
curled back, welling with tears.
I felt badly, but it also felt like a trick. This
was probably the first time in my life I did not
fall for it automatically, and realized I don't
have to give the click-whrrr response expected of
me. I apologized, but made a note. Generalizing
from my own experience (pardon the supermarket
psychology and latent sexism): you get to know a
guy, he says some frat-boy thing, and you say to
yourself, "Ah, fratboy." Or a gal says something
really strong and confident and you say to
yourself, "This woman has it going on." Or a guy
says something that shows he is not about fighting
to be alpha and you say, "Cool guy" (and you give
him the same sign, I hope). I think there are
dozens of categories we develop like this over
time. There is one I have had only a few occasions
to use, from a line in an old Western: "The Indians
will leave you along now, Woman, because you are
'touched'." On a small number of occasions I've
gotten to know a woman and realized fairly quickly
that she was not just fragile (which is fine), but
"touched" and had to be treated with kid gloves.
I'd say, example #1 from my life would be
SlimVirgin.
I mentioned SlimVirgin's Victorian dress to convey
what I just explained above. In a student pub in
which kids wore jeans and tee shirts, she wore
flowing, ruby red and emerald green dresses that
were more costumes than attire. I am the last guy
in the world to criticize another's dress (as a
student, I'd change my shirt once/week whether it
needed it or not, and I chose clothes less with an
eye to fashion than utility: for example, I spent
my undergrad years in cowboy boots and a Mexican
poncho). But in a 1988 English student pub at 3
o'clock in the afternoon, SlimVirgin would show up
dressed like she was ready for the start of the
evening shift at Denver Dolly's Saloon and Cat
House, c. 1890.
There were occasional student dances in the
basement: SlimVirgin stood out as a dancer (not
hard to do in England, where even women dance
poorly and men think Sid Vicious is hip). She was a
great dancer in a Grateful-Dead-Seaweed-Wave kind
of way, but with more style and rhythm than you'd
see at a Dead show. But what I remember about her
was her sense that she was Den Mother, somehow in
charge of the party.
I hope the reader understands now why I described
SlimVirgin at this length. She's the kind you meet
and realize, you'd better not only be on best
behavior, you'd better walk on egg shells, and not
return any flirty overtures, even in a good-natured
way, or else you are going to come in one day and
find that someone boiled your bunny.
I vaguely recollect what I said over dinner that
upset her, but am not completely sure I am not
confusing incidents. So as best as I remember, it
was this: a group of us were stretched along both
sides of a dining hall table. Nearing the end of
dinner and feeling like clowning around a bit, I
reached across the table for a French Fry from my
friend Jeremy's plate, and said in a posh English
boarding school boy's accent that I was just
learning to imitate, "Say, may I have one of your
ch-ips, lad?" Everyone froze. I suddenly remembered
that Linda been using a British accent for a few
weeks, people froze because there were wondering if
I were making fun of her, or if Linda would think I
was making fun of her, and there I was stuck with a
fry half-way to my mouth, so while the others
stared at their food I popped the fry into my mouth
and smiled at her in an attempt to show
friendliness, but instead she threw her face down
in her hands.
As I said, I cannot swear with certainty that those
were the events. But if it was not that exactly, it
was something very much like it, and I remember
wanting to reach out to her to say, "No, I was not
even been thinking of you when I made the joke, it
was thoughtless of me, I don't think you're being
pretentious for switching to a British accent," or
whatever I had to say to soothe her.
I backed away as some women there (led by a lovely
Scottish woman called, “Kanya” I think) tried to
console her, and when some time later another guy
came to the pub to tell me, "Linda's very upset at
what you said," I did go back to apologize and
explain, but a few women and Julian were sitting
there with her, and Julian waved me off. It was the
first time I recall seeing Julian and Linda
together, and they began dating that evening. I
believe he left Cambridge and was killed over
Lockerbie the following week, or one or two after
that at the latest.
After Julian’s death, she wore long black
gowns.
No one has the right to say to anyone, "You only
dated a guy for a few days (or a few weeks or
whatever) before he was murdered, so you don't have
the right to consider yourself, 'a widow.'" I know
I have had brief flings that, had after we parted
the gal been murdered, I would certainly have been
crushed and felt a duty to avenge her. So no one
has a right to judge another in such circumstances.
So I never bought into the snickers that started to
go around, mostly among women. I suppose what did
seem a little inappropriate, however, was her
emergence as one of the "leaders" of the Pan Am
#103 families: as word of that spread, it did seem
a bit off, and we all wondered how exactly she was
portraying her relationship with Julian.
Her use of "families" in my earlier story was
definitely intended in the "Families of Pan Am 103"
sense. That said, she did project a sense of having
“come from a good family" in Canada, used not as a
crass euphemism for "wealthy," but simply, she was
cosmopolitan and well-mannered (albeit dramatic).
In short, she was from a family of well-educated
people, and spoke of relations who were artists,
writers, or teachers, I seem to recall.
I just rang up a friend of mine from those days, an
English woman with whom I have not spoken in years
(the one who told me, when I asked about Linda in
1989 or 1990, that she had moved off to London or
New York, and was making Pan Am #103 her life's
work). I just tracked down this old friend of mine
in London. I'll summarize her recollection: "Yes I
remember Julian. He was a very nice boy. Linda was
a weirdo. She came to the King's Bar dressed like a
Goth, and was always crying in public. After
Lockerbie she was a wreck, but she was a wreck
before it as well. We felt badly for her, but after
a time it seemed like she was milking it, there
with the wives and brothers and children of the
deceased. I think I said something awful about it,
but I mean, really. I recall thinking she was
parlaying it into getting a job as a glamorous
reporter. And she did: didn't she leave and end up
working for ABC?"
I find it highly improbable that she was ever
employed by any intelligence service. I would
imagine that such groups have psychological filters
through which to screen candidates to select those
who are emotionally tough and stable. SlimVirgin's
instability could be spotted from across the
street. It is not out of the question that she
could be used by one or more of them, simply by
holding out the promise of feeling important.
However, she would be of extremely limited use, I
would imagine, and one would always have to fear
her stability.
That, in excruiating detail, is that. If you have
read this far I do hope you accept my apologies for
the length. I have followed your efforts to expose
perfidy within Wikipedia, perfidy which seems to
cluster around SlimVirgin. I knew I had information
that might answer some of your questions, but
thought that if I just wrote out my impressions it
would come across as simple gossip, though by
sharing details I could convey the broadest
possible picture that could be of use to
you.
In sum: you are facing a person who is intelligent
but went from unstable to unhinged, someone who
floated around the international press corps then
disappeared. She would be, I think, incapable of
designing on her own any grand plan such as what
you imagine, but she would be an easy target for
someone who wanted to manipulate her into devoting
her energy and intelligence to a bad cause,
probably by flattering her desire to play an
important role while confusing her with talk of
higher purpose.
Dear Daniel Brandt:
After the Panam 103 Lockerbie bombing disaster in
December 1988, when I was based in London as an
investigative and radio reporter for ABC News,
Pierre Salinger (then London bureau chief for ABC)
and I hired Linda, then a grad student at Cambridge
to help in the investigation. She claimed to have
lost a friend/lover on pan103 and so was anxious to
clear up the mystery. ABC News paid for her travel
and expenses as well as a salary.
Notable was a trip she made to Damascus (where
Salinger and I both touched down, among many other
places during our year's investigation), where she
wanted to interview Ahmed Jibril of the PFLP-GC,
then a prime suspect. He wouldn't talk to her.
Later, after we had been working with Jordanian
intelligence, she befriended one of their officers
who came to London to ferret out Abu Nidal's bank
accounts. Once the two Libyan suspects were
indicted, she seemed to try to point the
investigation in the direction of Qaddafi, although
there was plenty of evidence, both before and after
the trials of Maghrebi and Fhima in the
Netherlands, that others were involved, probably
with Iran the commissioning power.
I was no longer based in London when it happened,
but in 1991-92, after Salinger had traveled to
Tripoli and successfully interviewed the two Libyan
suspects (before their move to Netherlands),
Special Branch of Scotland Yard demanded all of our
tapes (including those not broadcast). Salinger
came to believe that Linda was working for MI-5 and
had been from the beginning; assigned genuinely to
investigate Panam 103, but also to infiltrate and
monitor us. ABC refused to hand over the tapes and
other documents the Brits wanted; Special Branch
raided our office and Salinger blamed Linda for
this. (At two subsequent trials, ABC lost an
expensive court case and had to hand over tapes and
documents, none of which contained any conclusive
evidence about the Libyans). At this point Salinger
fired Linda and locked her out of the office, after
she had been spreading some malicious rumors about
him.
I never saw her again after leaving London for my
new base in Cyrpus in late 1991. I believe she made
one phone call to me, but I avoided further
communication with her. I don't have any pictures.
When I last saw her, Linda was slim, brunette and
had a kind of wan beauty, like a heroine in a
Charles Adams cartoon or an upgrade horror film.
Salinger, of course, has long since gone to the
great newsroom in the sky. That's really all I can
tell you: other details have faded from my memory.
I hope this helps.
Sincerely, John K. Cooley
Shortly after this post appeared, Cooley was
contacted by Linda Mack and asked to refrain from
assisting Daniel Brandt in his investigation. This
established that Brandt & Co. had hit the bullseye.
In late August of 2007, Daniel Brandt contacted Dr. Jim Swire, a spokesperson for the British Organization "UK Families Flight 103," and asked whether he knew of Linda Mack. Brandt reports the following response: "I can confirm that the lady then calling herself Linda Mack was a Cambridge graduate and attempted to infiltrate an early meeting between our group (UK Families-Flight 103) and the American families in London. We had her thrown out when we discovered that she was 'wired' with a microphone under her coat." Brandt adds, "Dr Swire further stated that David Ben-Aryeah, who worked with Allan Francovich on the Maltese Double-Cross film, assisted in the ejection of Linda Mack from the joint relatives meeting."
It is assumed that Mack changed her named to Sarah
McEwan after being disgraced in the Salinger
affair. However, the team of Berlet and SlimVirgin
continued to play a dominant role at Wikipedia. The
Cooley memorandum establishes that Linda Mack, like
Chip Berlet, attempted to use conventional media as
a vehicle for the dissemination of propaganda and
disinformation, and suffered an embarrassing exposure. However, unlike Chip, who is
anxious to have his name appear as an "expert" in
Wikipedia as many times as is possible, Linda Mack
apparently saw Wikipedia as an opportunity to
resume her activities under what was assumed to be
an unbreakable, protective cloak of
anonymity.
 |
Glossary of Wikipedia terms and tactics2. POV pusher: one who imposes his Point of View on Wikipedia articles. Successful POV pushing is the sine qua non for hard-core Wikipedia contestants. 3. Consensus: discussion among editors is supposed to result in consensus, which theoretically will help establish a Neutral Point of View in articles. In practice, the term "consensus" refers to the dominant POV at any particular moment. 4. Admin: Short for administrator. Acquiring admin authority is another highly desired objective for Wikipedia contestants. It enables you, for example, to block or ban your opponents. It is similar to the way some video games function, where by attaining a higher level of the game, the contestant acquires new powers. 5.Blocks and bans: a contestant may be temporarily blocked from editing by an Admin, or permanently banned. Normally the reason given is that the contestant is violating Wikipedia rules. However, more powerful admins (see Cabal) may use other rationales, such as simply calling the contestant "disruptive," or a "sockpuppet." "Sockpuppets" are new online editing identities created by adding additional accounts; this can be detected by a check of IP number, unless the contestant uses a service provider with dynamic IP, which is quite common. SlimVirgin is famous for saying that she didn't need an IP number check to detect a sockpuppet, because she possesses "exceptionally well-honed linguistic analytic skills." 6. Tag Team: editors, or in the more advanced form, administrators, who team up to influence consensus. Administrators may team up to block or otherwise sanction one another's opponents, to create the desired consensus. Two of SlimVirgin's most well-known tag team partners are Jayjg and Will Beback. 7. Oversighting: an edit history is maintained on each Wikipedia article, so that the reader can read all previous versions of each article and see how and by whom it was altered. However, in special cases, an admin can erase portions of the edit history, a practice called "oversighting." This technique was used to destroy evidence of misconduct by SlimVirgin by her tag team partners, notably Jayjg. 8. The Cabal: the highest gaming level of Wikipedia. Becoming a member of The Cabal means attaining unheard of powers, including effective immunity from all rules. However, to attain these powers, one must adjust one's own POV to suit that of The Cabal. The Cabal was described by Wikipedia chieftain Jimbo Wales as a concept that would "empower some shadowy mysterious elite group of us to do things that might not be possible for newbies." 9. Notability: A person who has received significant press coverage may become the subject of a Wikipedia biographical article. This is called being "notable." Linda Mack may have finally crossed this important threshold.  Jimbo Wales, founder and god-king |